Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: PA12 versus PA18

  1. #1
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Chugiak, AK
    Posts
    694

    Default PA12 versus PA18

    What your favorite and what are the Pro's and Con's of each. Im wanting to get one of the two hopefully in the spring and cant make up my mind.

    Terry

  2. #2
    Member akmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    143

    Default Cub vs Cruiser

    What you want to do with the plane will make a difference. If you expect to be in and out of short strips with loads or at altitude then go with the PA-18. If you are looking for a plane with a little more room then the PA-12 may be the better answer.

    Mac

  3. #3
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,216

    Default

    I recommend that you visit the supercub.org web site.

    This debate occurs on a regular basis.

    A few things to think about.

    1. PA-12 did not come with flaps from the factory. They were all added later.

    2. PA-12s Originally only had a 100 to 108 HP engine, all others were added later via field approvals, STCs and mystery appearance.

    3. There were LOTS more PA-18s originally built.

    4. There are lots more new after-market tube frames for PA-18s.

    5. The original PA-12 landing gear has enternal bungees, for off field work they need a PA-18 style gear set up.

    Having owned and flown both, they both ghave their place. There are many other differences but I have to get going...
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    8

    Default

    As stated above a supercub is a better stock perfomer but the PA-12 has a lot more space. Seats two in the back and more shoulder room in the front. If you want the best of both world you can mod a PA-12 to come close if not match a typical supercub in performance. Mods include extended wings, flaps, vortex generators, Lycoming O-320 (160HP) or O-360 (180HP) engine, ect... I've seen amazing stol characteristics from a PA-12 with the above mods. In my opinion PA-12's especially with the right mods are underrated in Alaska which is good because they can be had for a bargain.

  5. #5
    Moderator AKmud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Wasilla, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    3,185

    Default

    Is the 180 hp engine really that much better than the 160 hp? I have talked to some pilots who say the extra weight of the 180 counteracts any performance benefits you get.
    AKmud
    http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j96/AKmud/213700RMK1-1.jpg


    The porcupine is a peacful animal yet God still thought it necessary to give him quills....

  6. #6
    Member algonquin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seldovia, alaska
    Posts
    839

    Default

    the 160hp can be perked up quite a bit with the tuned exaust and brought up to ruffly 175 hp and w/ a flatter prop you can get more rpm and thats more hp. If you aren't going to be flying into places less than 1000' a PA22-20 is a good choice. If you are going to do lots of mods like above you can get supercub performance for less money on a pacer than doing a PA12 over. you can get into a Pacer for less than 30,000. call or visit Eddie Trimmer at the willow airport, he has a tricked out Pacer and holds several stc's

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,293

    Default

    There are very few Supercubs or PA-12s around that haven't been modified so any comparison based on stock performance is probably worthless. There are good airplanes and bad airplanes and a whole lot of in-betweens. I'd rather have a good PA-12 than an average PA-18 and vice-versa. For my purposes they're all Cubs.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Pid View Post
    There are very few Supercubs or PA-12s around that haven't been modified so any comparison based on stock performance is probably worthless. There are good airplanes and bad airplanes and a whole lot of in-betweens. I'd rather have a good PA-12 than an average PA-18 and vice-versa. For my purposes they're all Cubs.
    +1

    What kind of flying will you be doing? SuperCub is a household name and you will pay a premium to get your hands on one. Have you thought about a Citabria? Poor mans Supercub!
    Personally I'm a big Taylorcraft fan. If you are just flying for pleasure they are cheap, fast, and a blast to fly.

  9. #9
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Chugiak, AK
    Posts
    694

    Default Curently

    Currently I have a 1973 Bellenca 7GCBC, with 29" Garo aero's, 80/40 prop, VG's and a 300 hour factory Reman 150 horse wide deck. It flies great and I can get up and down pretty good, like 300 feet with very little wind. The only thing it lacks is extended gear. The big problem is Gross weight is only 1650, gives me a 370 pound usefull load. I would like to some day put it on a 135 Cert some day.

    Terry

  10. #10

    Default

    I bought a J3 Cub (actually a Legend Cub) last Spring and have to say it is the most fun I have had flying. It is economical, as simple as a plane gets, and easy to get into tight remote spots. All this on 5 to 6 GPH. It also doesn't require a medical. Flaps would be nice for dragging into tight spots, but good technique works as well. The new light sport aircraft have a lot to be said for themselves. Again depending on your mission, the two aircraft you mentioned are both good planes.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,293

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Terry View Post
    The only thing it lacks is extended gear.

    Terry
    31" Bushwheels would give you a higher AOA and would ease the stress on your gear compared to the Gar's. That's a lot cheaper than a new plane. Especially since most Cubs will gross at 1750. But most of the Cub drivers I know can't count to 1750 anyway.

    From everything I've seen and heard a 7GCBC is a darn good airplane. What's your cruise with your prop and tire combo?

  12. #12
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Chugiak, AK
    Posts
    694

    Default Set up

    With my current set up I cruise at 100 mph, Soon I will need to put my shorter climb prop on with my skis and I will what it does to my cruise.

    Terry

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
  •