Increase in CubCrafters + Aviats being listed

ArrowFlyer86

ArrowFlyer86

En-Route
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jul 17, 2019
Messages
3,285
Location
Around
Display Name
Flight
As someone who tracks aircraft listings for a hobby -- I've noticed a substantial increase in the number of Aviat Husky and CubCrafters aircraft for sale over the last year.
What stands out to me is they're both STOL-y bush planes, and both have substantial price tags. I'm thinking it can't be a coincidence that both have had these sort of boom in listings.

Meanwhile Maules, which serve a similar backcountry STOL-y mission, and of which there are many more than CubCrafters (~2.5x as many from what what google tells me) haven't budged that much at least on the sites I look at. Same for the PA-18 SuperCub listings. Yet there's more cubCrafters for sale than Maules.

Curious to hear any theories on why those numbers might be elevated. I have no working explanation or theory lol.
 
Theory on carbon cubs. People think they're all carbon fiber.

Theory on the influx of CC's and Husky for sale. The vast majority of the country isn't what they're designed for. So they don't get used for their ideal purpose and people realize they can probably get to a grass strip in something faster and more comfortable. A 400k bushplane is stupid when your not flying it in the bush. At that point it's become a phallic symbol

On why their isn't the influx of maules. Their marketing department sucks in comparison. The guys that buy em know the value of them compared to the above and personally I think they are more utilitarian.

I will take any of the three if you're buying.
 
Last edited:
ArrowFlyer86 said:
As someone who tracks aircraft listings for a hobby -- I've noticed a substantial increase in the number of Aviat Husky and CubCrafters aircraft for sale over the last year.
What stands out to me is they're both STOL-y bush planes, and both have substantial price tags. I'm thinking it can't be a coincidence that both have had these sort of boom in listings.

Meanwhile Maules, which serve a similar backcountry STOL-y mission, and of which there are many more than CubCrafters (~2.5x as many from what what google tells me) haven't budged that much at least on the sites I look at. Same for the PA-18 SuperCub listings. Yet there's more cubCrafters for sale than Maules.

Curious to hear any theories on why those numbers might be elevated. I have no working explanation or theory lol.
Click to expand...
Aging pilot population. Insurance hits em with too hefty of a premium on taildraggers for them to keep flying?
 
Racerx said:
Theory on carbon cubs. People think they're all carbon fiber.

Theory on the influx of CC's and Husky for sale. The vast majority of the country isn't what they're designed for. So they don't get used for their ideal purpose and people realize they can probably get to a grass strip in something faster and more comfortable. A 400k bushplane is stupid when your not flying it in the bush. At that point it's become a phallic symbol
Click to expand...
I don't know about phallic, but I do agree that lots of people don't use them for enough in specialized environments to justify the cost.

Lots of people watch YouTube videos, think it looks fun, then maybe do a trip a year to somewhere interesting. Meanwhile, they have 51 other weeks a year doing hamburger runs into paved strips.

Racerx said:
On why their isn't the influx of maules. Their marketing department sucks in comparison. The guys that buy em know the value of them compared to the above and personally I think they are more utilitarian.
Click to expand...
When people ask me about Maules I always say that they aren't very good at much of anything.

However, they are 'good enough' at useful load, speed, STOL, seating and cost that the blend of things makes them a really competitive option.

EdFred said:
Aging pilot population. Insurance hits em with too hefty of a premium on taildraggers for them to keep flying?
Click to expand...
If that were it, then one would expect the Maule's to be following the same pattern.

If I'm guessing, it's mostly a follow-on from what @Racerx said. Maule has pretty bad marketing and for a while had a bad parts department. Parts availability has been fixed, but due to both of those issues they didn't move nearly as much inventory during the upswing in backcountry interest over the past 10-15 years. Because they didn't ride that wave, they also aren't seeing a bubble in the second hand market as people get burned out and move on to their next hobby.

Kitfoxes boomed also. They would be interesting to compare to CC and Husky.
 
People watch Youtube and decide they want that plane and lifestyle. Then most likely realize they don't have the location, nerve, or skill to do the type of flying those planes were intended for and flying around doing 90 mph burning 10+ gph getting rocked by every thermal kinda sucks when you are heading to the same location that Cherokee 140 just beat you to.
 
A lot of money for an aircraft with a narrow mission profile. Makes for a fun 2nd airplane, but not a terribly useful single airplane. Perhaps with the economy, people are shedding some of their extraneous toys.
 
rwellner98 said:
I don't know about phallic, but I do agree that lots of people don't use them for enough in specialized environments to justify the cost.

Lots of people watch YouTube videos, think it looks fun, then maybe do a trip a year to somewhere interesting. Meanwhile, they have 51 other weeks a year doing hamburger runs into paved strips.
Click to expand...
I guess I lump the carbon cub crowd with the jacked up truck crowd. Pretty useless as a truck. But it seems to represent something else.

I'm with you on the kitfox. Ive been going back and forth between a Kitfox and a highlander. I would absolutely fall into the not use it for what it was built for crowd. But I'd like to build it and my neighbor does have an alfalfa field about 1,000' long. Would be nice to fly a plane to the airport (that's a 12 minute drive away) to fly the other plane. Yes I'm aware its stupid.
 
Racerx said:
I guess I lump the carbon cub crowd with the jacked up truck crowd. Pretty useless as a truck. But it seems to represent something else.
Click to expand...
Ok, I gotcha.

I think of them as more like a UTV. Not generically the best vehicles out there, but if used for their purpose can be game changing and a whole lot of fun.

Racerx said:
I'm with you on the kitfox. Ive been going back and forth between a Kitfox and a highlander. I would absolutely fall into the not use it for what it was built for crowd. But I'd like to build it and my neighbor does have an alfalfa field about 1,000' long. Would be nice to fly a plane to the airport (that's a 12 minute drive away) to fly the other plane. Yes I'm aware its stupid.
Click to expand...
My alfalfa field just got cut yesterday. Going flying later. :-)

Also used to regularly fly out of my yard to the breakfast place that is only a few minutes away. Not stupid. :-)
 
The majority of Carbon Cubs are purchased as toys by guys who can afford spendy toys. As with many expensive toys, they’re rarely used and lose their appeal quickly. Insurance is insanely expensive. Owners see sales adds with very high prices and begin to believe those asking prices represent market value. Listing them for sale makes sense, given the backlog for buying new ones. Meanwhile, good Supercubs rarely get listed because they sell quickly by word of mouth.

You guys who visit the Lycoming booth at Osh Kosh may see an experimental SQ Supercub on display. I’m told it’ll be for sale at $600K. I bet it sells quickly.
 
I know a few guys who fly Carbon Cubs, and they’ve all upgraded to the newest model at least a couple times. They have the bucks, so good for them. Many of the CCs for sale could be the same thing - time to upgrade to the latest and greatest.
 
ateamer said:
I know a few guys who fly Carbon Cubs, and they’ve all upgraded to the newest model at least a couple times. They have the bucks, so good for them. Many of the CCs for sale could be the same thing - time to upgrade to the latest and greatest.
Click to expand...
That's incredible. Because even the old Carbon Cubs aren't "old" by any aircraft standard.
Hell, I just checked and even my car model year is older than 80% of the CubCrafters listings! I can't imagine moving up to the latest and greatest airplane after like 4-5 years!
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
That's incredible. Because even the old Carbon Cubs aren't "old" by any aircraft standard.
Hell, I just checked and even my car model year is older than 80% of the CubCrafters listings! I can't imagine moving up to the latest and greatest airplane after like 4-5 years!
Click to expand...
Have you seen older carbon cubs? They don't age well. Being built light doesn't bode well for longevity.
 
Grum.Man said:
Have you seen older carbon cubs? They don't age well. Being built light doesn't bode well for longevity.
Click to expand...
I've seen the older ones on Trade-A-Plane and Controller, but not in person. Even the old ones look pretty sharp from what I see in the photos.
Also, that assessment is coming from a guy who flies a 1972 Piper... So I'm quite accustomed to aircraft that might show some wear + tear!
 
Grum.Man said:
Have you seen older carbon cubs? They don't age well. Being built light doesn't bode well for longevity.
Click to expand...
Do tell. What is it you see that qualifies your statement? How many “old” Carbon Cubs do you spend time around? How many new ones? How many Piper Cubs? How many SQ Cubs?
 
Stewartb said:
Do tell. What is it you see that qualifies your statement? How many “old” Carbon Cubs do you spend time around? How many new ones? How many Piper Cubs? How many SQ Cubs?
Click to expand...
I am specifically talking about carbon cubs. I've been around enough to make the statement. Maybe the newer ones got better but the old ones have cracking cowlings or excess wear due to how thin they are. Same goes for windows. Loose fabric seams or finish cracks, smoking rivets, elongated bolt holes. The early engines have issues due to reduced sump capaciy. Now which models ie experimental or slsa I'm not sure. Just general observation from hanging out at a maintenance shop that specializes in them.
 
If there’s a downside to being light? It’s durability of the tubes. Fabric is no different than other tube and fabric planes. Cowls, same. What’s vulnerable in Carbon Cubs is internal. Structural. Not visible to the eye. I’m fixing to walk my dog around the hood. I’ll see more Cubs and Carbon Cubs than most guys see in a year. I prefer my SQ. With only 4 of them here we’re a minority.
 
Based on my observations, overall number of listings for single engine prop aircraft is going up. Less than a month ago the number of listings (based on my search criteria on TAP) was little bit below 1100 today it is 1170.
 
EdFred said:
Aging pilot population. Insurance hits em with too hefty of a premium on taildraggers for them to keep flying?
Click to expand...
I'm looking at the FAA airmen statistics, and in 2001, the average age of private certificate holders was 46.0 years. By 2018 it had increased to 49.0, but in 2024 it was back to 46.0.
 

Increase in CubCrafters . . . being listed​


People with more dollars than sense trying to reduce their carbon footprint?
 
FormerHangie said:
I'm looking at the FAA airmen statistics, and in 2001, the average age of private certificate holders was 46.0 years. By 2018 it had increased to 49.0, but in 2024 it was back to 46.0.
Click to expand...
I meant ownership (of those models) population. How many puppy millers with 300k in debt ( which drops the avg pilot age) own those planes. And it was a question more than it was a statement.
 
Racerx said:
Would be nice to fly a plane to the airport (that's a 12 minute drive away) to fly the other plane. Yes I'm aware its stupid.
Click to expand...

Not really. I pondered learning to fly a paramotor so I could fly from the house to the airport. But something in me just won't let me fly one of them things ...
 
Ashara Keliyn said:
Based on my observations, overall number of listings for single engine prop aircraft is going up. Less than a month ago the number of listings (based on my search criteria on TAP) was little bit below 1100 today it is 1170.
Click to expand...
I feel like 1100 to 1170 is hard to quantify until we have more monthly data...however, I am seeing in general, cars, boats, houses, etc., are being put more on the market and staying on the market due to less buyers. All the drama this year is putting a lot of people on the sidelines, not to mention the continued tightening up of the money supply and job market softening compared to the last 3-4 years.
 
Racerx said:
Would be nice to fly a plane to the airport (that's a 12 minute drive away) to fly the other plane. Yes I'm aware its stupid.
Click to expand...
When I was getting my Private, this guy who had 30,000* or so hours in an Aerolite flew it 20 minutes one-way from his farm to take "lessons" in a Cub.

*Estimated.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
Maybe the owners all plan to upgrade to the Carbon Cub UL (Ultra Light)…

Click to expand...
Now I still couldn't justify this over a much older plane...but this ultra light model is quite the upgrade and has me drooling a bit...
 
Matthew K said:
I feel like 1100 to 1170 is hard to quantify until we have more monthly data...however, I am seeing in general, cars, boats, houses, etc., are being put more on the market and staying on the market due to less buyers. All the drama this year is putting a lot of people on the sidelines, not to mention the continued tightening up of the money supply and job market softening compared to the last 3-4 years.
Click to expand...
And also higher interest rates.
 
Daleandee said:
Not really. I pondered learning to fly a paramotor so I could fly from the house to the airport. But something in me just won't let me fly one of them things ...
Click to expand...
Yeah. Something in me won't let me die in one of them things.
 
slinger said:
Yeah. Something in me won't let me die in one of them things.
Click to expand...
A lot of people say the same about small airplanes. Actually the fatality rate for PPG is comparable to GA in general.
 
I've started thinking about buying a Scout so I could have a matched pair with my Decathlon, but those are rare on the market compared to Super Cubs.
 
Ed Haywood said:
I've started thinking about buying a Scout so I could have a matched pair with my Decathlon, but those are rare on the market compared to Super Cubs.
Click to expand...
Having flown a 8GCBC Scout, I don't see why anyone who owned one would ever sell it.
 
Matthew K said:
I feel like 1100 to 1170 is hard to quantify until we have more monthly data...however, I am seeing in general, cars, boats, houses, etc., are being put more on the market and staying on the market due to less buyers. All the drama this year is putting a lot of people on the sidelines, not to mention the continued tightening up of the money supply and job market softening compared to the last 3-4 years.
Click to expand...
Here's some data I collect, though for select certified aircraft mfrs/models. I think it's an OK representation of the single engine mkt though.
You're definitely right about the increase in listings across other categories, houses + expensive toys in general. Things take longer to sell these days. Couple of data points from this post and this post, with this article also supporting the climb in toys for sale.
1752958113919.png
 
Cubcrafters has announced they’re now selling the certificated X and NX Cubs as E-AB kits.
 
hindsight2020 said:
It's also not established that asking price has any traction with actual sales price. Delistings are very common, as they are in housing.
Click to expand...
Its like my neighbors saying, "we are letting the market decide," but increasing the price when it did not sale for 8 months. They ended up delisting I think.
 
Corin said:
Its like my neighbors saying, "we are letting the market decide," but increasing the price when it did not sale for 8 months. They ended up delisting I think.
Click to expand...
And it cost them nothing to see, or effectively nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top