Performance Air Cub

[cobblemaster]

I added up the parts that come with the kit and compared to a standard airframe inc frame and dakota cub wing standard. The wings are 17750.00 with flaps, ailerons and 23 gal tank. The frame is 12820.00 with doors and tail feathers.

I came up with $43442.00 if you bought all certified parts that comes with the PA kit, using 2002 prices.

 

[Crash]

If you're half ass good at dickering you can knock about $5K off that price, and for the other $5K difference I'd walk away from the Canadian kit. Crash

 

[cobblemaster]

True you can 10% off what you get from Univiar. Are you saying Airframes and DC will give a big discount if you ask for it. Im surpised that you diss the Performance Air kit so much when you havent seen one or have you? Isnt Steve at PA the guy that invented the new gascolator that screws on that everybody talked so highly about. ?

 

[Crash]

Cobbler: It might be a good kit, but how many are flying and what do their owners say about the build process and support? Do standard PA-18 parts just bolt on or is everything special built just for it. Airframes Inc. went throught it's teething problems on it's first dozen or so fuselages, where are these guys in this process. Dakota went through it's problems, mainly keeping up with demand. I've also seen kit planes that were built and then the owner tried to sell it and had no takers. I remember some of the posts about "Smith Aviation" on the Cub Crafter site and they had a bunch of pissed off, former customers. It's your money, spend it the way you want. I wish you the best. Crash

 

[irishfield]

Re: PA

Hey, I was doing some research and it appears that the Performance Air Cub from ID and The Daytona Cub from FL are the same airplane. Both are built in Canada by Smith Aircraft and resold here in the US by these two outfits.

Yes indeed they are! Noticed a few posts questioning the Smith Aircraft works design . They must be doing something right as they are putting out approximately one complete aircraft per week, at the present time. I have been in their fuselage facility North of London, Ontario and they sure had me convinced that they know what they are doing. Another seperate facility is building wings, with about 10 full time employees of it's own, and yes they use square tube in place of drag and anti-drag wires.

If anyone wants to check them out really close, they will be at Sun n Fun once again this year. This time they will have a Smith Xtra-wide fuselage sitting on Clair Sceli's "CLAMAR" www.clamarfloats.com glass amphibs sporting an "ATP" TURBINE www.atpcoinc.com !

Go have a look and draw your own conclusions in person before beating up their product unseen, based on pictures in a magazine!!

Cheers,
Wayne

 

[cobblemaster]

I looked at 2 flying and one in progress. Just about all the parts are made to Piper planes except the brakes master cylinders that will be stcd for certified use. Piper parts are interchangable.

 

[diggler]

delete

 

[Steve Pierce]

The gascolator is from Steve's A/C in White City, OR. http://www.stevesaircraft.com/
I was at Performance Air this past spring and saw the kits. They were nice. I wouldn't go that route because of the value of the finished product. I could buy a SC in need of restoration and rebuild it cheaper. I paid $10,000 for my L18C project with a perfect fuselage. The wings need some work from being moved around by people who didn't care. Most of the little pieces are their. It is like money in the bank to me. I haven't had a chance to work on it in some time but it keeps increasing in value. I have been involved with experimental homebuilts for many years and very rarely have seen them sale for more than materials cost. I think it is a great product from what I can tell, just not for me.

 

[hottshot]

Diggler ,

Nope Performance Air and I.F.S are not the same outfits

 

[diggler]

delete

 

[Zooey]

Brad,

If you need lots of horsepower to haul amphib floats up out of a little lake surrounded by tall trees, maybe you should consider something like this: http://www.airbum.com/BearhawkNorthernPilot.pdf The one Northern Pilot flew weighs 1125 lbs. empty on wheels with no electrics--"except a starter and battery"...and I'm guessing an alternator,too--and has 4 seats, huge cargo doors and a 260 h.p. Lycoming 540. That oughta make a homesick amphibian angel.

--Zooey

 

[Cubus Maximus]

Bearhawk

Zooey,

Your right, the Bearhawk is an awesome performer and really hauls the freight. Problem is, it's just not a Cub. Other considerations of course for building up an amphib Bearhawk are the engineering challenges and cost.
The Bearhawk will require at least 2350's if not 2550's and none are operating on floats that I know of. I'm not much of an experimenter after building most of a Kitfox IV years ago. (sold it and bought a Cub)

The engineering for the Cub on floats is well established and parts + knowledge for the aircraft are abundant (kit parts are interchangeable with the certified airplane). The aquisition and operating costs of a small bore Lyc will always be less expensive than a big bore 540.

I think I'll watch the guy here who is planning on purchasing a Smith Cub soon (and putting in a 200 hp O-360). Most likely I will just go the certified route and if a 180 Cub on Wip amphibs can't operate safely out of this spot (I think it will), I'll just have to go with straight Baumann's or find a place to dock on the lake across the road.

Brad

 

[Nathan K. Hammond]

I think everybody has made good arguments as to which would be better Exp. or Cert. Here?s my two cents. You guy?s bashing the resale value of a homebuilt are correct in that you wont get your money back, but who say?s your going to sell it. I mean with a Homebuilt it?s basically a Super Cub with out the data plate, and it can be exactly the airplane you want, with all the toys and gadgets that suit your needs. Maybe you want it to be IFR, a big engine, or have a door on each side, the list goes on. For me I wouldn?t plan on selling an airplane like that. It?s safe to say any of us will part ways with a C172 or an Archer with out too much remorse, because you can find another 40 on Trade-A-Plane. But a Super Cub (or clone) is too hard to come by.


Further, you guys got me wondering how much an Experimental Cub set up for my likings would cost. Figured on what it would cost to end up with the same airplanes; one Experimental, and one Certified with the same mods.
Here?s what I came out with:
Experimental: $91,000
Certified: $115,000*

So For me, the homebuilt is the way to go.

* for the Certified version I started with a $75,000 mid-time SuperCub

nkh

 

[Crash]

Nathan: You might say "today" that you would keep a "custom kit" plane for the rest of your life. What happens when you eventually loose your medical and can't stand to see it wasting away due to lack of use and you want to sell it. You then take the hit of ROI (return on investment) AND you take on 25 years worth of product liability. Life changes and it goes on. I have totally different intrests today then I had 20 years ago and expect in 20 years for them to be different then now. At some point you WILL want to get out. My net worth is a lot more then $24K (difference between $115K and $91K, your numbers). No when I sell it, I am out of the picture, it's Piper and the last A&P that signed it off who's neck is on the line. That is why A&P's like doc and Steve get paid sooo much. Crash

 

[RedEye]

parts total

Diggler, no I haven't added it all up. I've got all the invoices in a folder, not too sure I want to know!!! When I get a chance I'll add it all up n post it here! Just off the top of my head, I'm guessing around 65,000, maybe a little less!!!

 

[bobnall]

Nathan's probably close to the mark on what it would take to build the Performance Air Cub. I went over to Caldwell about a year or so ago to look at the kit, and was very much impressed with Steve Tubbs' presentation. I had my IA with me, and he also was impressed.

Steve said a good kit could be built for about 60-65k. I went home and priced it out. I stopped counting at 73k. Granted, I priced it out with a 180 hp engine, Borer prop, 29" Bushwheels, and did not price in spendy radios. A close look at the kit shows that there is a LOT more to buy after buying just the kit. This is no different that getting any other homebuilt kit, but the price put me off so I bought an older used Cub for a lot less.

Unfortunately, a week after I bought my Cub, I had an accident and am now doing a total rebuild. When complete, I'll have spent about the same as I would have for the Performance Cub, but will have a certified airplane instead.

 

[PA12driver]

You guys are all probably glad I haven't posted yet, (so no one would have to throw the Cats into the ring?

I have owned, built and rebuilt a half a dozen "certified cubs" and have been happy with all of them, never lost money, and in some of the years actually got back even my "labor" mind you I worked pretty cheap! However I am seriously considering building the next plane licenced Experimental, solely for the flexibility to do "what ever the heck I want" to it to enhance performance! Crash, I couldn't agree more with you about the return on investment being virtually non existant on an experimental/homebuilt! I think it all depends on how a person intends to fly his "cub". every time I take mine out to practice at the extreme edge of the performance envelope I reconize the risk of bringing back a truck load of project parts? It is my choice to do so cause that is what I like to do. What I have noticed is that 90% of all cubs are no longer flown like the utility plane they were designed cause the "owners" look at them as an investment not a tool or a toy? I quit flying 185's for that very reason! I could and did take my 180/185 into about 85% of the places in Alaska that I took my cubs, the problem is every time I threw a rock into the stab or dinged a leading edge or a prop, I took several thousand dollars of the "resale value". Toys should be toys, investments should be investments".

Just a perspective, not a directive! (Bottom line is you will spend likely about the same to get the same quality and performance)

Tim

 

[hottshot]

I'm with Tim on this one !!! :x as soon as I can I plan on puting one of these here EXP-CUBs in my shop and spending some TOY time!!

Wup

 

[Nathan K. Hammond]

Tim, your the man. And i think all homebuilders know they won't get they're money back. Alot build just for the fun of building. And when that time comes that i can't get a medical, hell i'll buy a farm and keep flying by myself, away from everybody. If i don't endanger anybody else, whats the harm? On a serious note, you could always just part out the plane; engine, radios, etc.... Many folks have found that the individual parts of a plane can add up to more than a complete A/C. Who knows, Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Have fun go fly.

nkh

Crash, not to start anything but i bet i can pee farther than you !
HAHA

 

[SuperCub MD]

Are they really selling one kit a week? 33.5K a week building uncertified parts...no liability...Hummm, maybe it's time to quit rebuilding this old certified stuff and get into the kit plane business. Although it sounds like Steve and I can just move North and become Crashes full time mechanics, that's probably a easier gig.

If they are selling one kit a week, just wait about 5 years, and you will be able to pick up a lot of half finished kits at half price.

I'm not bashing experimentals, so don't give me a bunch of whinning, I hope they sell kits by the thousands, more power to them. A world with more Super Cubs, either kit, scratch built, or certified, is a better world. Just giving my opinion on the kit planes I have seen laying around unfinished.

 

[Steve Pierce]

And history repeats itself. I agree with you Mark.

 

[Dave Calkins]

It appears the Performance Air Cub kit WINGS are already assembled.

What a huge time-saver, and emotional hurdle already past for a prospective homebuilder guy. Looks like the fuse and tail feathers are already powdercoated, too.

If this kit is your basic "cover job" with brand new, powdercoated, comes new in the baggy, fresh, doesn't need to be cleaned-up, ready-to-go pieces, with a little fitting of fairings following the covering process, this should be an idea that takes off well.

Especially for the guy who wants to modify his a/c and fix it himself after a ding.

This thing has a lot of the guys I'm talking to excited, what with the Field Approval process becoming basically a "one-time STC".

Also, it opens the door for the great fiberglass floats available today.

Of course, you have to live with the limitations of the Experimental category airworthiness certificate. For alot of guys, "so be it".

Dave Calkins.

 

[PA12driver]

I hope they succeed! Van's sure put the "big guys to shame with the number of RV's out there? He can't make the kits fast enough! I have been hanging with a lot of EAA's lately and I tell you there is a talent pool there that is second to none! I owned a 77 185 that a 10 year old with a ball peen could have hammered rivets better and yet the FAA approved it?

I trust this latest crap with the FAA will get enough people united around the country to remind the "govt. that they work for us" and we are the writer of the checks! Some upper level management people need more then a Zerk fitting in the aft part of their fuselage to get the drift that we don't need an STC to modify a map pocket! Morre layers and more money won't fix the problems!

Heck it's late,

Good night!

Tim

PS: Dave C. sorry to hear about the carnage in the Anchorage and valley!

I have heard from a few friend and the horror stories continue!
Crash? any damage up at Hill top? how did Birchwood and Wasilla fair?

 

[Steve Pierce]

Talked to my FAA guy the other day. Seems a comittee rewrote the FA document and then one guy changed everything they did for the worst. We will see if that version makes it to us.

 

[Crash]

Wind

Tim: Hilltop and Birchwood had little to no damage. Most of the damage was at Merrill and Lake Hood. A lot of the guys had their planes facing south, the wind came out of the north and collapsed their wings. Others just wern't tied down good. It was also bitter cold and at night so it was difficult to get out and do much once it really started blowing. Crash

 

[Dave Calkins]

Definitely lots of cases of a/c taking the wind from the rear.

Basically, if it was a Cub and it was facing away from the wind, the wings got collapsed. The numbers stated by the media and the airport staff are waaayyyy off. Any Cub tailed to the wind got nailed. Surely there will be a run on Cub parts for awhile.

Some a/c were not well tied, others had anchors give way.

CARNAGE.

Dave.

 

[cobblemaster]

Not buying a kit just yet. Bought a 2000 Aviat Husky. See you guys later...............

 

[irishfield]

Not buying a kit just yet. Bought a 2000 Aviat Husky. See you guys later...............

Looks like "flagold" swayed another one.......................... :lol:

 

[wyocub]

I am almost finished recovering my cub, and a lot of ad ons. The extras are a real hassle as far as 337s as most of you already know. Even things that people have been doing for yearsand seem to be no brainers are a dead end when it comes to the FAA. The word anymore is no STC no ad ons, and I have had enough its either an experimental or live with someone else tellingme what to do with my airplane, paying thousands of dollars for annuals, and getting worse all of the time. I can do my own annuals, and better work than some of the so called machanics that Ive run into and not have to worry about getting robbed in the end for the work that they do. Not that all are bad by any means. I am either going to sell my cub and build an experamental or change yhe cub I have now to an experemental. I may take a small loss in value but I think that in the long run it will be worth it. Maybe crazy,but fed up. Appreciate any input.

 

[FlipFlop]

I am almost finished recovering my cub, and a lot of ad ons. The extras are a real hassle as far as 337s as most of you already know. Even things that people have been doing for yearsand seem to be no brainers are a dead end when it comes to the FAA. The word anymore is no STC no ad ons, and I have had enough its either an experimental or live with someone else tellingme what to do with my airplane, paying thousands of dollars for annuals, and getting worse all of the time. I can do my own annuals, and better work than some of the so called machanics that Ive run into and not have to worry about getting robbed in the end for the work that they do. Not that all are bad by any means. I am either going to sell my cub and build an experamental or change yhe cub I have now to an experemental. I may take a small loss in value but I think that in the long run it will be worth it. Maybe crazy,but fed up. Appreciate any input.

A word of caution about "going" experimental... I doubt that you can find a Fed that will certificate a store bought Cub as amateur-built (51% rule)... Am-blt is the only experimental category that you can do your own maintenance... Most store boughts that are modified and put in experimental category go into experimental-exhibition... Ex-ex have to be maintained IAW FAR 43 because they were previously certificated in another category... Am-blt also have few flight restrictions, ex-ex are very restricted... Contact your FSDO and talk to a maintenance inspector before you go off the deep end...