Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 78

Thread: Maule M4 220C - is this a good plane for a new pilot

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer, Alaska
    Posts
    72

    Default Maule M4 220C - is this a good plane for a new pilot

    I am a new pilot with about 130 hours. 100 hours in Cessna 172 and 30 in PA-18 on floats. I am considering a Maule. I'm looking for some words of wisdom from you guys. What do you think of the Maule and the Franklin engines, is this too much airplane for a new pilot? I live on a lake and want to put it on floats. Things to look for before buying this plane... How does the M4 fly compared to a Cub... I'm not sure what to ask, any thoughts?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlaskaKodiak View Post
    I am a new pilot with about 130 hours. 100 hours in Cessna 172 and 30 in PA-18 on floats. I am considering a Maule. I'm looking for some words of wisdom from you guys. What do you think of the Maule and the Franklin engines, is this too much airplane for a new pilot? I live on a lake and want to put it on floats. Things to look for before buying this plane... How does the M4 fly compared to a Cub... I'm not sure what to ask, any thoughts?
    NOTHING flies like a Super Cub !!! Others, of course, will disagree. Visibility from a Cub is without compare. Not so with a Maule. Except for its rather small ailerons, nothing handles as nicely as a Cub, either. And it will handle a much heavier load than the placard will allow.

    As for your hours and a Maule, you'll do fine, just as long as you learn its shorcomings one step at a time. With its short fuselage, it's sometimes a chore with directional stability in turbulence, but you'll do fine with that. The Maule wing has a great chord, but a lousy winspan. Still, it's a great airplane. It was originally built on a Piper Pacer airframe, a fact that contributes to its relatively poor directinal stability at times. Still, you'd learn to fly it well if you take it one step at a time.

    Some of us still prefer the Cessna 180 for performance. Costs may dictate what you will do about buying the airplane. I won't vote for the Maule, but I won't vote against it, either . . . . . It's a good airplane, but we've all seen a lot Maules piled up in the bush somewhere, usually with a poor outcome to its inhabitants.

    I realize I'll catch hell for this response ....................................... !

  3. #3
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,218

    Default

    What do you think of the Maule and the Franklin engines, is this too much airplane for a new pilot?
    1. Not much.
    2. Could be.

    Call an aircraft insurance agent and check out the cost for a Maule vs a Cessna.
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  4. #4

    Default

    Grizzly 2 is on the money. I learned to fly in a pacer, then got a cub. Every year our friends do a fly about. Lots of metal and fabric planes go on it. Nothing flies like a cub!! That is not to say a Maule or pacer are bad planes. You need fast feet on wheels and they are good planes on floats. I had flown my pacer around a good part of alaska with no problems, you just need a longer runway depending on weight. Short wings and hot days don't go well together. Check with the Maule guys on just what it will do on floats and see if it will fit your needs. How good is the motor??? Franklin engines have a good rep but parts might be hard to find I would not get one unless I knew and personally spoke to someone who could fix any problem on it. Remember you fly in a hot part of the world
    DENNY

  5. #5
    Member Sierra Hotel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chugiak
    Posts
    637

    Default

    I'll chip in that getting parts for the Franklin engine is getting to be in the realm of the almost impossible. Google the Stinson Club, which has a lot of installed Franklins to learn about them. FP hit the nail on the head with his comment about insurance, especially here in AK. Prepared to be shocked into breathlessness

  6. #6
    Member algonquin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seldovia, alaska
    Posts
    840

    Default

    I've had two Pacers, one with a 160 hp and it was a good plane. The draw back is on wheels they can be a handful in the wind and short fields, when heavy, are a problem. The M-4 is very close to this model pacer. I never flew it on floats but have fown a M-7 235 on wp 3000 amph's. fun airplane but not a jump off the water plane, but not bad either. So The only draw back for me would be the engine for above reasons. Flown with in its performance window they are fun airplanes and very capable.
    I now have a 180 and a 185 way diferent planes with a diferent mission. The skywagons are really nice airplanes, the only thing is they burn more gas and cost a bit more. If you can swing it the 180 is a good family plane, if not what ever you buy will be good fun, just fly it in its performance limits. The ins. on floats for the 185 is over $6000.00.

  7. #7

    Default

    I have 80 hr total time and own a pitts S2B and will hopefully be learning to fly it this summer, pending finding hangar space. Avemco quoted me 6500 a year but you can buy insurance 3 months at a time so if you dont intend on flying in the winter its really pretty affordable now. The insurance companies have segragated the guides from the rest of us so we dont get burned on insurance anymore.

  8. #8

    Default

    I'll back Grizzly 2 UP on this one also!!

    No comparison to a cub! Gotta represent my home town of Lock Haven PA!!

    Here is a contact for franklin engine parts and info. Susan @ 903 626 5210 Very nice gal.

    I was watching this aircraft until my wife approved me for a larger loan. Think this would be a good bush starter. If you trust franklins.



    Good luck!!

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

  9. #9

    Default



    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loose Change View Post
    I'll back Grizzly 2 UP on this one also!!

    No comparison to a cub! Gotta represent my home town of Lock Haven PA!!

    Here is a contact for franklin engine parts and info. Susan @ 903 626 5210 Very nice gal.

    I was watching this aircraft until my wife approved me for a larger loan. Think this would be a good bush starter. If you trust franklins.



    Good luck!!

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
    I had a Cessna 170-A model with a 165 heavy case Franklin for a few years. With its climb prop, it was a pretty good ship, and it wasn't all that bad for some of our bush work, too. Never had an engine problem at all. With its 8.50 x 6 whels, and a climb prop, it went just about anywhere we wanted it to go. Including some pretty steep weedy mountain ridges and slopes.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer, Alaska
    Posts
    72

    Default

    Thanks for all the great advice. I would love to get a 180-185 but that is out of my budget. Need to keep it under 50K. That 172 looks good just too much$$ right now. Please keep the info coming. You guys are great!

  12. #12

    Default

    Offer $50,000 ya never know! I have learned that you can't sell yourself short. Some of these guys are wishing for the old days to return when they could get lots of money for their aircraft. Some will get what they want, but I see a lot of them that have been forsale for years.



    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

  13. #13
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,218

    Default

    I did a guys float rating in a 172 just like that in 2011 ,,, ( In fact I just checked my log book to make sure it was not the same plane) and it was a real go-getter off the water and in cruise with that 220 hp Franklin.

    It was a bit of a fuel hog while doing splash and goes on the lake,,,, but she got you where you needed to go a LOT faster than a Cub when you dialed the prop for cruise...
    I was amazed how fast she got off the water as well.....
    If you could talk him down a little I would be all over that like at a free buffet line.
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    northern alaska
    Posts
    1,160

    Default

    For a low time pilot a maule is a horrible choice. An old maule makes it even worse than horrible. Walk away and don't look back...

  15. #15

    Default

    There is nothing wrong with a maul, if you get the proper instruction and dont solo until your sure your ready you will be fine. Dont by a C172, they are junk, unless its been modified with a huge engine they are grossly underpowered. Dont take out a loan, just buy with cash, buying and owning a plane is already enough of a head ach without involving a bank.

    My biggest blunder in buying my plane was not buying a hangar first, even if the plane you buy does not require a hangar the last thing you want to be doing on a cold winter day is going out to sweep off your wings. Finding hangars for rent at a reasonable price in south central is almost as difficult as finding a good girlfriend in anchorage. You can find nice hangars for SALE all day long in the spring. The hangar can double as a man cave and depending on what you buy you can set up a shop in there, perhaps get your own A&P and work on your plane, lots of versatility when you own your own hangar.

    Dont put yourself in a position I was in (I finally found a good hangar) where I was scrambling to find a hangar for rent. Lots of money at stake when the alaska weather can punish an air frame. Dont even think about a plane right now, just buy a hangar, even if you decide not to be a pilot you can rent the hangar out and you will have people lining up, its a little taste of what its like to be a hot girl who sets up a dating profile.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,462

    Default

    I think that rrpearso said that he has a pilot log book jam-packed with about 200-hours. He couldn't have logged very many hours in a C-172, and I doubt that he has many hours in a Maule, either. I don't want to be unfair to him, but it might be well to consider recommendations from such contributors as Float Pilot, Mr. Pid, pipercub , Loose Change and a few others. Those guys, singularly and collectively, have many, many thousands of hours of Alaska flying experience.

    Moreover, the C-172 is recognized as one of the world's great airplanes, and much, much safer than most . . .

  17. #17

    Default

    A 180 hp skyhawk is a fine airplane. It is a much better plane than most realize, especially in Alaska where it's short field capability is needed. It is certainly no super cub or 185, but it cost a lot less. Add a stol kit and such, and it should do fine. I think that the 172 182 206 all have the same 174 sq ft area wing? I agree about the hangar. At least in N Alabama reasonable hangars are available, and yes, it is the man cave.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pipercub View Post
    For a low time pilot a maule is a horrible choice. An old maule makes it even worse than horrible. Walk away and don't look back...
    Really, I have probably the oldest Maule in Ak. Serial #9. I also was a brand new pilot when I bought it and hired an instructor to teach me and have been enjoying it ever since. Go to the Maule Forum for real answers about Maules and get away from all the Cub Drivers and Cessna guys who think Maules don't have a place here.

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    East Haddam , Connecticut
    Posts
    111

    Default

    A 172 is a fine airplane, to learn to fly in and to own. You can buy one reasonable. And it will not cost you an arm and a leg to run. They are far from junk from an 80 hour wonder would say. Cessna made some 15000+ of them. Granted It might not be the perfect ideal, what ever that is. But for a new pilot, could not go wrong with one. I will not opine on the Maule's since I have not flow them much, maybe 600 hours worth in an M-5. Its an airplane. The main thing is buy less that what you think you can afford, this way to can go out and fly some. Its a waste to drop the kind of money a Super Cub or a 180 or 185 goes for these days then not have enough extra cash to fly when you want to.

  20. #20
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,218

    Default

    rppearso, two days ago.

    I have 80 hr total time and own a pitts S2B and will hopefully be learning to fly it this summer, pending finding hangar space.

    BH206L3 today

    I will not opine on the Maule's since I have not flow them much, maybe 600 hours worth in an M-5.
    Plus one for BH206L3
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •