Return of the Maule M4

rwellner98

rwellner98

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
1,272
Display Name
Display name:
rw2
Interesting announcement from Maule today.

http://mauleairinc.com/maule-m4-180v/

M4-180V S2 & S4

OLEO Strut Main Gear Taildragger
Double Cargo Doors
Engine: Lycoming (2000hr. TBO) 0-360-C1F
Gross Weight: 2300 lbs. (1043 kg)
Empty Weight: S2: 1350 lbs. (612 kg) | S4: 1375 lbs. (624 kg)
Useful Load: S2: 950 lbs. (431 kg) | S4: 925 lbs. (420 kg)
Stall Speed (full flaps / power off / light weight) (IAS): 43 mph (37 kts)
Take Off, Ground Roll (light weight): 300 ft. (92 m)
Take Off (light weight) over 50' obstacle: 700 ft. (214 m)
Landing (light weight) over obstacle: 900 ft. (274 m)
Service Ceiling: 15,000 ft. (4572 m)
Fuel Consumption US Gals. @ 65% Power (avg.): 9 gph (34 lph)
Cruise (75% Power / Opt. Alt.) (TAS): 134 mph (116 kts)
S2 Base Price $199,900
S4 Base Price $203,900
 
I'm a big fan of the round tail! I've heard the M4's fly the best too... But I have zero maule time.
 
A bargain compared to the 300+ the local dealer is asking for a new Husky(granted I don't know the specifics for a real good comparison, but they appear to be at least comparable)...

I've always loved the Maules. I almost bought one for my first airplane, but went with a boring nosedragger instead. A local guy has one and he puts skis on it in the winter and very fat tires on it in warmer months.
 
FormerHangie said:
GAMA says that in the first nine months of last year, Maule shipped three airplanes: http://www.gama.aero/files/documents/2016ShipmentReport-Q3.pdf

I'm not sure that the M-4 is back so much as it is that you can now order one if you want it.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Also getting parts from them takes months if not years. Not kidding. We waited on a cowling for 12 months. We got a box of shimmy dampers last spring that had a 2014 order date.

They didn't have any aircraft at Oshkosh that I saw. Only a tent that was partially manned during the day. I don't think their doing to hot these days sadly.
 
What's the diff between the S2 and S4 other than a few thousand bucks?o_O
 
The M4 Maules were the only ones I liked the looks of. Glad to hear they're coming back.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
I'm a big fan of the round tail! I've heard the M4's fly the best too... But I have zero maule time.
Click to expand...
go set in one, tell us how much runway you can see in front of you.
 
The best of the bunch was the M7-235
 
Mtns2Skies said:
You'll have to clue me in Tom.. do they have poor visibility?
Click to expand...
When you are taking the runway with a Maule, line up on the centerline, you'll not be able to see the other end of the runway. it's below the cowl until the tail comes up. (It's short fuselage thing)
With the C-170 you can see the runway 50' ahead of you with the tail on the ground. yes,, I'm spoiled
 
Maule is a fantastic airplane. I have quite a few hours in them and loved every minute! Great cruise, four place that has plenty of room and they are a blast to fly. They are a bit of a goofy design though. Ugly as sin with the hideous tail group design but that is function over looks at its best. HUGE horizontal stab with a tiny rudder but that is what makes it all work. Our oldest boy got his first hour of flight time in one, we are very proud of that!
 
I've said it before, if you're ever in the area stop by the factory there in Moultrie GA and get a tour. Great folks.

Agree with Tom D, love the M7-235.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
You'll have to clue me in Tom.. do they have poor visibility?
Click to expand...

Nah, not bad at all. Better than many tailwheel airplanes. But, yeah, tailwheel is different and anyone considering them should fly the ones they are interested in before getting too far in the process.

As an example, here's the visibility from mine while doing an off airport take off.

 
Tom-D said:
When you are taking the runway with a Maule, line up on the centerline, you'll not be able to see the other end of the runway. it's below the cowl until the tail comes up. (It's short fuselage thing)
With the C-170 you can see the runway 50' ahead of you with the tail on the ground. yes,, I'm spoiled
Click to expand...
My M4 had fantastic vis over the nose...way better than most anything else.
 
rwellner98 said:
Nah, not bad at all. Better than many tailwheel airplanes. But, yeah, tailwheel is different and anyone considering them should fly the ones they are interested in before getting too far in the process.

As an example, here's the visibility from mine while doing an off airport take off.

Click to expand...
The 170 has better vis over the nose with the tail down, than that.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I did. My M4 was better.
Click to expand...
Bull scat,, I've flown both. My 170 would haul more too.
Little short fuselage and narrow gear,, = squirrelly little aircraft.
 

Attachments

  • P1010002.JPG
    P1010002.JPG
    71.6 KB · Views: 5
  • 20140208_130443.jpg
    20140208_130443.jpg
    121 KB · Views: 6
Tom-D said:
Bull scat,, I've flown both. My 170 would haul more too.
Little short fuselage and narrow gear,, = squirrelly little aircraft.
Click to expand...
You obviously never flew my Maule...and I'm guessing that you assume I'm a liar just because you're so full of crap that you can't imagine anyone else being different.

Good day.
 
MauleSkinner said:
You obviously never flew my Maule...and I'm guessing that you assume I'm a liar just because you're so full of crap that you can't imagine anyone else being different.

Good day.
Click to expand...
I never said you were a liar,, but I do believe you are bias. see my edited post above to see the difference in cowl design. between the maul, and a 170.
 
This thread is another example of " never criticize anyones aircraft"
 
Are you guys friggin def or just playin honey badger with me? What's the diff between the S2and s4?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top