Brand-new for 1946 - tell me about taildraggers, please

So at 6'4" and 200lbs do I have any hope with these old birds?

My tall (6'2" at the most) friends feel cramped in the Luscombe and only ride in it with me for the experience, not because it is comfortable. I am 5'10" so it is fine for me.
 
So at 6'4" and 200lbs do I have any hope with these old birds?

yep, my grandpa had 2 taylorcrafts, (1 of which is now mine) and he is 6'6 280 pounds, he and I flew that Tcraft all over the country!!
 
So at 6'4" and 200lbs do I have any hope with these old birds?

As aviators we will put up with a great deal of physical torture in our quest for flight but it's usually the feet that just won't fit at some point.
 
As aviators we will put up with a great deal of physical torture in our quest for flight but it's usually the feet that just won't fit at some point.

Yes, but I won't fly 150s. One and done for me:yes::yes:
 
I think they are all great, I have had the privilege to fly
Luscombes, T-Crafts, 120/140's, lots of different Cubs,
Lots of different Aeronca's.
My current plane is a Vagabond with a C85. Side by side stick,
Nearly full span ailerons, 95 mph cruise, and good short field.
They are all really fun!
Dave
 
I think they are all great, I have had the privilege to fly
Luscombes, T-Crafts, 120/140's, lots of different Cubs,
Lots of different Aeronca's.
My current plane is a Vagabond with a C85. Side by side stick,
Nearly full span ailerons, 95 mph cruise, and good short field.
They are all really fun!
Dave

Man after mine own heart :yes:
 
So at 6'4" and 200lbs do I have any hope with these old birds?

The honest answer is no, you won't find one that will be comfy. The link I gave to the Commonwealth might be your best bet, but still not at all roomy.
 
So at 6'4" and 200lbs do I have any hope with these old birds?

Honestly, at that size, you're probably going to be more comfortable in a Stinson 108. Which honestly, is in the same price range, but is going to cost a bit more to feed.
 
Honestly, at that size, you're probably going to be more comfortable in a Stinson 108. Which honestly, is in the same price range, but is going to cost a bit more to feed.

Or get something like your new toy, unlimited headroom!
 
Stinsons aren't that roomy inside either. In fact they have the same 39 inch cabin width as a Luscombe which is about 3 inches less than a 172.
 
Or get something like your new toy, unlimited headroom!

Yeah but that poses other problems. 6'4 wouldn't fit in leg wise, I reckon.

Stinsons aren't that roomy inside either. In fact they have the same 39 inch cabin width as a Luscombe which is about 3 inches less than a 172.

Someone who is 6'4, 200 isn't probably going to be worried about the width, but the ability for leg room.
 
Yeah but that poses other problems. 6'4 wouldn't fit in leg wise, I reckon.



Someone who is 6'4, 200 isn't probably going to be worried about the width, but the ability for leg room.

I have short legs, I wear 32" inseam pants:lol:
 
Could some of y'all please go over the differences and pros/cons of the 1940's-era 65-85 HP taildraggers that are commonly available in the $25k range, i.e.:

  • Luscombe (the only one I have experience with)
  • Taylorcraft B
  • Aeronca Champ
  • Piper Cub
  • ??

Pro & cons?
My first tail dragger CFI was an old Navy trained guy and the fastest on the controls of any I've seen. His first statement when I started training for the TG rating was, "All of the horror stories you've heard about tail draggers are true."
 
Is there a reason a more modern LSA taildragger wouldn't be considered? You can still get the taildragger nostalgia but with newer, owner-maintained airframes and powerplants to save money? "Saving money" is arguable but it's a whole separate route that didn't seem to be thrown out there for chatter......
 
Is there a reason a more modern LSA taildragger wouldn't be considered? You can still get the taildragger nostalgia but with newer, owner-maintained airframes and powerplants to save money? "Saving money" is arguable but it's a whole separate route that didn't seem to be thrown out there for chatter......

What modern LSA taildragger is anywhere near 2x the budget of 25,000?
 
Is there a reason a more modern LSA taildragger wouldn't be considered? You can still get the taildragger nostalgia but with newer, owner-maintained airframes and powerplants to save money? "Saving money" is arguable but it's a whole separate route that didn't seem to be thrown out there for chatter......

See below.

What modern LSA taildragger is anywhere near 2x the budget of 25,000?

That.
 
Stinsons aren't that roomy inside either. In fact they have the same 39 inch cabin width as a Luscombe which is about 3 inches less than a 172.

and they have a hammock back seat, which will kill your back in about 2 hours.

several of my 170 owners are well over 6 foot and 200 pounds, and they are comfortable in the Cessna170.
 
It is but generally Chiefs are slightly faster than Champs so it doesn't go along with the theory about fuselage width. there are many other factors related to drag. For instance, when I am solo in my Champ it will cruise around 85 mph but if I put a 250 pound buddy in the back seat it'll do 92.

My TW instructor had a Chief with an engine upgrade that made it cruise near redline. They are VERY cozy with 2 on board.
 
None of the "brand new for 1946" aircraft are S-LSA.

No, but when someone says modern LSA taildragger, that means S-LSA to me. Which limits it to a new Cub or Tecnam or a few others that are just as expensive. Or a Champ.

So what do you have.
 
Porterfield?? I see there are some available in the $25k price range, many use "standard" Continental/Lycoming, and they can qualify as LSA (though I was not trying to limit this question to LSA).

ex.

http://www.controller.com/listingsd...IELD-LP-65/1940-PORTERFIELD-LP-65/1255317.htm

img.axd


http://www.trade-a-plane.com/detail...ston/1940/Porterfield/Collegiate/1658149.html

jhimage
 
Last edited:
If you aren't limited to something a sport pilot can fly, there are some Funk's out there for decent money. A different airplane that will be sure to bring attention to you at the fly in.
 
Could some of y'all please go over the differences and pros/cons of the 1940's-era 65-85 HP taildraggers that are commonly available in the $25k range, i.e.:

  • Luscombe (the only one I have experience with)
  • Taylorcraft B
  • Aeronca Champ
  • Piper Cub
  • ??

Add Interstate Cadet. :yes:
 
Add Interstate Cadet. :yes:

Yah, I saw that also on the LSA list. But how common/available are those in the $25k range? I see one on Barnstormers for $22.5k so I guess they are out there:

.watermarked_9989bc18dbb149294b41d5247c153e8b.jpg


As I mention, I was not specifically looking to limit to LSA, I just wanted to know more about the low HP two-seaters out there.

How do the Porterfield and Interstate compare to the others? And stand-out qualities or problems?
 
Saw a Funk at Moraine Airpark i73 Thursday night.

Cheers

Funks gross weight is too high to be sport pilot eligible. Were you at Moraine? Stop by hangar 44 and say hi!


-VanDy
 
Funks gross weight is too high to be sport pilot eligible. Were you at Moraine? Stop by hangar 44 and say hi!


-VanDy

Sport pilot not a factor for me. Initial cost and fuel burn is.
 
Sport pilot not a factor for me. Initial cost and fuel burn is.

There's a funk for sale at I73 asking 13.5k 85hp continental, I can put you in contact with him of you'd like


-VanDy
 
There's a funk for sale at I73 asking 13.5k 85hp continental, I can put you in contact with him of you'd like


-VanDy

Thanks but this is mainly for future reference and recommendations to friends. I am pretty locked into my Arrow right now.
 
Back
Top