Agree w/aktango...not seeing much meat on that bone.
To compare, all one has to do is research the lift coefficients for each employed airfoil, (at Cl max in this case).
The Aeronca "Champion" series employs the NACA 4412 airfoil, Bellanca continued the same with the 7 series to include the 8GCBC. The Aeronca "Chief" series employs the Clark Y airfoil. And the venerable Cub (J-3/PA-18) employ the USA 35B. The wing with the greatest value for the product (mathematical value) of Cl max times the wing area wins in the lift department (all other variables being equal). When we require more lift (assuming we are at Cl max), we have three options, increase velocity, change the airfoil to one with a higher Cl max value, increase the wing area. This is why wing extensions are generally the approved solution when more load carrying capacity is required (structural considerations ignored in this discussion). We increase the value of Cl max times the wing area thus increasing lift. One of the most common examples is the Grumman Ag Cat. Employs the NACA 4412 airfoil, we desire more lift, least invasive solution is to extend the wings, for which there is an STC that authorizes such. This is not a complete win as it comes with a detriment to other aerodynamic characteristics, notably drag and roll rate in this example. As always, any solution is typically a tradeoff and is dependent upon mission requirements. And sometimes, the "suggested solution" is merely searching for a problem.
TR