AVweb's Cub vs. Champ Shootout
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 авг 2024
- Piper's venerable J-3 Cub and the Aeronca Champion are classic ragwing taildraggers that are becoming popular as LSA choices. In this nose-to-nose comparison, AVweb's Elaine Kauh and Paul Bertorelli take a close look at both aircraft.
HOLY CRAP - THAT IS MY CUB! I purchased this Cub from Sam Rinaldo in upstate New York in the early eighties. I recovered the wings and had everything back to original. We won Reserve Grand Champion with it. I hangered it a Becks Grove Airport and flew in and out of my back yard runway. Sold it following the the birth of my beautiful daughter 33 years ago (only two seats and we were now 3). Loved this dear plane like a family member. I have goose bumps and tears. NC22726 lives on!!! Thanks for the memories.
Its for sale again! Looks like a lot of fun.
I started out my ag flying career many years ago by chasing birds off of sweet corn in a Champ, I always loved flying that plane.
Just bought a Champ.
Now to learn to do fabric.
Feeling excited.
Brianne C
Same here. I’ve had my Champ for just over 2 years. Fabric was damaged in a hail storm. It’s patched for now, but will be looking to re-cover it within the next couple of years. Good on you for taking the job on yourself. It’s becoming a lost art.
My first solo was in a J-3 Cub and my last airplane was also a J-3 Cub. I sold it to a guy who lived in Bangor, ME (I lived in Black Forest, Colorado) and the kicker on the deal was I'd check him out on the flight to his home. It only took six days and 33 hours flying time but when he got there he could fly it from either seat, navigate using sectional charts and do it with no radio of any sort. He's also flown under power lines, bridges and three feet above the ground.
Nice video.Definitely go with a Champ if you want to go somewhere.Cubs are more suited to just messing around in the pattern.I used to worry about having enough fuel to go to 25 miles with a slight headwind in a Cub.The Cubs frame is not chromolly tubing while the Champs is.
Best AVweb video I've seen in quite a while. Love both these birds. Good job
I'm partial to the Champ. Owned a '46 way back in 1972
The Champ is the first airplane I fell in love with, both the champ and the cub are wonderful airplanes and so much fun. Thanks for the fantastic video.
Awesome! I'm just new to tail wheel flying - checked out in the Super Cub, which is challenging; however, the extra power and flying solo from the front seat probably makes it a little more forgiving than the J3 with less power, and flying from the back seat - So, I'm looking forward to flying a J3 :)
Both are nice planes. However, I like the Chief is my favorite, then the Champ.
Another thought has to do with the ageing of the aluminum planes. I do hope this is being looked into.
the more challenging choice! Will make you a better pilot
Now, you both made a point of mentioning "adverse yaw". I'm in my 70's and first learned to fly in the 60's. I thought ALL aircraft exhibited "adverse yaw"! I was taught; "That's what the rudder is for!"😅
Great video. One of the planes I learned to fly in was a restored 1941 J-3, owned by my buddy, a CFI. Adored that thing! I also took taildragger lessons in his 1959 180, but it was a machine, while the Cub was alive (that sounded silly). He always said he wanted a champ, and we borrowed his friend's once. For whatever reason, my heart went to the cub. Even though it was slower, it felt more responsive, like it just WANTED to be tossed around. Great fun! In any case, they are both great little planes that teach you to fly by what your butt tells ya, and that's invaluable.
I first learned to fly a Cub as a young teenager . My family owned one , and a Champ that was rented for instruction. I flew both all the time . I happened to solo in the Champ because someone just finished some instruction in it that that day.
Both were 65 hp with no electrical and mechanical brakes . I liked them both . Maybe the Champ was more practical ( for most people ) in some ways but, when given the choice , I always chose the J-3. The reason ? just seemed to be more fun to fly. As far as performance ? I remember the Cub as getting off the ground slightly faster , and I could land it slightly shorter , not much different though. The Champ would do better if poorly flown though --again --slightly. Easy to bounce a Cub!. If I were to buy one today ? it would be a Champ because of price .
I later moved to the PA-12/18's and they are the greatest ( and the easiest fly ) tail dragger's ever built IMO. Expensive now day's sorry to say .
I would love a PA-18 as my choice, but going with a Champ due to price.
Never got to fly a cub sadly but have some hours in a 1946 Champ. It had a C65 that was running on condition and very tired. Great fun , I’d love to fly another before I’m gone.
With the Champ at rest being in takeoff configuration, I was taught not to push the tailwheel off the ground, and that's the way I fly it. The whole airplane just flies off when it's ready. Lots of tailwheel pilots feel the need to get that tailwheel off the ground right away, I realize. With the Cub, the improvement in forward vis is obviously one reason. Great video; keep 'em coming.
Outstanding overview and comparison of two classics. Thanks guys!
Learned to fly in a 1939 Champ from two barnstormers in from a sod field. You use the seat of your pants and the sound of the wind. Great old bird.
owed two Aeronca Defenders, a 1941 and a 1942 also had a J5 Cub, I liked the Defender's landing gear better than the Cub but liked all three planes, never paid over $2800 for any of them in the mid-seventies, flying was fun back then
FYI, one reason it takes more down elevator to lift the Champ’s tail off is the Champs balance on its main gear is different. The weight on the Champ tailwheel is about 20 lbs higher. My cub tailwheel weight is 52 lbs. My friend’s champ weighs 74 lbs.
Hey Paul, The later 1946 & all of the1947 had metal spar wings as standard from the factory, not wood as you said they all did. Your's apparently is a 1941 model looking at the panel. From my experience, the Cub cruises at about 72 mph with the A-65 Continental & standard prop and the Champ about 85. Just want to set the record straight. Liked the video
That's actually a 1940 panel- it has the inlay in the center! 1941 was the nearly the same- same layout, no inlay.
It is not a 1941 model. It's a 1938 model. December, to be precise. If the panel was changed to the later style, they bothered to keep the original Sport placard. All the documentation confirms this.
I first soloed in a Cub and have to admit my landings were sometimes spectacular with me bouncing down the runway and sometimes throwing in a ground loop for spectator enjoyment. I had to learn side slipping to land on the short obstructed runways. I never took to the Cub and switched to a Cessna 150 enjoying the tricycle landing gear, fuller instrumentation and flaps.
Great video!
As another pre-war cub owner (1940) that came from the factory with a Franklin, it's important that your Cub is still registered as a J3F or there is a clear line of paperwork on file from the CAA/FAA to show the actual conversion to a J3C in the records. I had to find out the hard way during a FAA investigation that a continental engine on a Cub that was originally Franklin powered (and a J3F from the factory) does not make it a J3C....although there is no real physical difference. Piper made them with three different type certificates, and it can get.....confusing.
I used to part own a 59 Champ which had an O235 / 115 HP. It performed really well.
this is a long stretch being you commented 2 years ago, but I am looking at a champ right now the guy says it has a 0235c. I have not found any info or ever heard of the engine. if this is what you had, how hard were the parts to find?
Still loving my ‘47 Cessna 140. 500 lbs useful load, 640 FPM climb (book), 5 hrs range, full electric. Just gotta watch that spring steel gear 😵😵😀😀
I have better advice regarding the landing.
My father logged, believe it or not, 40,000 hours. Among all the flying he did, he was a CFI and taught me how to fly after converting his 172 to conventional landing gear.
The technique for Landing is like any other practice you have for other basic skills : Some altitude, clearing turns and then practice keeping the aircraft at a little above Stall Speed with the nose about the same pitch as it was when you were sitting in it on the ground. You want to practice holding it at that airspeed and that attitude. Bring in the power as necessary but keep your airspeed just above a Stall. *Do note, the wings will stall if you make abrupt maneuvers so, simply keep that in mind and practice Stalls before you practice this technique.*
Both the Cubs and the Champ aircraft may need to be slipped as you approach the runway but keep the wings level, line up on the centerline and use just the Rudder to adjust. You should no longer be slipping the aircraft as you back off the engine power over the end of the runway. As you Flare, only slightly lower than in a Trike, keep easing the stick back as you approach Stall speed, (if you have too much airspeed or engine power, the wings will climb you away from the runway). Soon, you will be at that pitch you practiced in the air and that you felt at rest in the airplane. With a little practice, you will 3 point, glassy smooth.
...and "slide your vision along the side of the cowling" as the tail lowers. "Your peripheral vision will tell you if the edge of the Runway is getting closer, further away or staying the same."
I love conventional gear aircraft.
Fun point: Cub has heel brake pedals. And the pedals for the back seat brakes are UNDER the front seat. Lots of fun with cowboy boots.
IMHO, it's all about the Cub's clamshell door combined with sitting in the rear, which gives more of an open cockpit experience.
If the clamshell door/window is open, I greatly prefer the Cub...but if closed, then I prefer the Champ.
I've had time in both. They're both great aircraft to fly!
But for older pilots the champ is way easier to get in and out of
@@sblack48 Absolutely
great video but I would love to hear how different factory types perform on the same power.
I used to fly a 1944 L4 Cub, and absolutely loved it! Bags of character, always had the side open. No good for going places (too slow) but you can't beat it for just bimbling around. Not flown a Champ but I've flown a few Citabrias which I found to be bland compared to the Cub, even though they were aerobatic (ish!).
Really comes down to , do you want the wing that gets off the ground the quickest , or can you live with 10% more ground roll or not, about everything else in a Champ is better , the room, the rate of climb, the visibility, etc. I would say if your a smaller person than a Cub is fine, if your 6ft and 200lbs of course you can get into a Cub [with some contortions] but it is pretty darn uncomfortable. Most Cub folks conversation is over, after they tell you how quick it gets off the ground. The Champ has many things about it that is desireable. They are both fun to fly and if there is any other thing that is bad , the prices of Cubs is almost absurd compared to the Champ , considering when they were both NEW they cost the same???? So resale on a Cub is going to be better as long as the fad holds up.
Love the page!! love the videos!! love the reviews!! can you make a review from the Ercoupe? thanks!!
Great video, very helpful. Nice job.
I learned to fly in a flying club in college, mostly with 7AC Champs and some time in a J-3 Cub, both 65 hp. I much preferred flying the Champ. More responsive stick, faster cruise, better visibility, and you flew from the front seat instead of the rear.
ME TOO. THE CUB IS AN UNCOMFORTABLE PLANE,THE CHAMP IS A DOLL.
Great video of a rivalry that must have been going on for as long as each brand first came off the drawing board and into the sky.
Don't know if it's relevant ... I would've liked to see the Taylorcraft included in this comparison. I know that the T-craft had a different airfoil which supposedly made it faster (?).
I notice here that the Champ has real wing dihedral while the Cub has none.
Good story! I've had the chance to fly both. As much as I enjoyed the Aeronca, I really had more fun in the Cub. Biggest thing to remember is ya don't get there fast.
Great piece, BUT you should have included Interstate (S1-A) Cadet. About 300 made in 1940's with near 100 still active. With the Cont. A-65 it is faster than both the Cub, and the Champ, out climbs both, and is stronger (for rough fields). It also has the best control harmony (by far) of the batch. Mine is 1942-still going strong. I've flown all three and my choice is the Interstate, by a large margin. 52 yrs flying+still at it.
Flown both with various engines. Champ was specifically designed to address what most operators didn’t like about the Cub (visibility, slow cruise, drafty door, cramped cockpit, etc.). Nothing comes without costs. Champ is a little worse performance on 65hp other than faster cruise. Ailerons are heavier.
Champ wins for me, but summertime fun with no particular place to go… well, Cub with the doors open is hard to beat.
Best all around is Champ with 85hp Continental. Fantastic combination!
The cub has the name and reputation, probably because of its use in the military during WW2. If I could only have one, just for general airport hopping, Im going with the Champ, it solo's from the front seat, and its more comfortable to operate.
I would love a ride in either :)
Aeronca was in the war too. O58 and L3. The aeronca Champ also carried on into the Korean war as the L16.
Great video!
I though that you could not fit the C65 with a starter, is that true? Haven’t flown a Cub but I do think I would prefer solo in the front seat. The Champ with the electrical system looks pretty cool but being exempt from ADSB is pretty cool too. As to speed the Champ I fly has the 65 HP but cruises at 80MPH. Love the Champ.
How can you put a starter on an a65-8? Or do you have to swap out the accessory case to make it a -12?
Don't you just hate all the wind static? Otherwise Great video, enjoyed the landings
I owned a Champ and knew guys with cubs. Both of them would sit on the ground, stopped, and with the brakes on you can lift the tail off the ground at full throttle. 2 wheeling them on is far too fast. With no flaps, side-slip to lower speed and just let go just above stall. It will naturally straighten out. 42 mph will put you firmly on the ground. Stall is so easy you have to work hard to get it to snap. Beautiful little airplane.
I understand that you chose the champ because of availability.
But I think a real comparison would have been with an Aeronca 65, O58,or L3. All built in the same time frame, designs the same, looks the same.
My uncle was a test pilot for Aeronca and was killed in an L3 in 43 when a wing folded up on down wind turn. The lower strut bolt had been installed wrong.
But before that while testing a ground adjustable prop on an L3, one blade flew off ,which I have, and it tore the whole engine from the mount. Yet he was able to land the aircraft successfullh all because of being able to solo from the front seat. He was able to shift his weight forward just enough and with trim got it on the ground.
The aircraft was repaired and sent on to the military.
Piper just had better marketing.
aw I miss my champ, put a few hundred hours on it and did a bunch of tailwheel signoffs in it. only flown a cub like twice. champ was easy to do signoffs for trike flyers cuz they sit in the front and just tell them to flare twice as much as they are used to doing for three pointers. for wheelies, tell them just nose down slightly for a low closure rate and don't pull back for any reason (well except for a gust pushing you down too fast) then push forward about an inch when touching. "balls of steel" I would tell them :)
Champs are roomier inside. And a bit more comfortable to fly in.
But the both need more then just 65 hp. I find 85 helpful. But 100 hp seems about right.
So what’s the best plane to get and the easiest to get for somebody who wants to learn to fly and beginners?
I like that you don't have electric start. There's a lot of trust in your aircraft. A lot of I know what and how my aircraft works.
Thanks, better video than most.
Awesome vid. What yr model is the cub? Nm i got it. 1938 wow. Not too many 38 vehicles of any kind in service period with the exception or planes i guess. Both are beautiful
The j3 cub fuselage is not chrome moly tubing it is mild steel tubing
Nice! Thanks.
as a person who knows nothing about flying but how to buy an airline ticket lol why do you like to fly the cub from the back seat just asking
What does a complete cover job on an airplane like the Cub cost these days?
If you do it yourself materials are between three and six thousand .
I need to do mine so I have been shopping around.
Taylorcraft BC12-D with an 85 continental beats them both. I might be biased, though. #N95896
Dc12d 43192
I never understood the price difference when the champ is in some ways a better airplane and they are both essentially the same thing
how much was that engine?
Learning to fly Citabrias, I'd love to fly a Champ.
+daveyl123 I currently have 56 hours in 7ECA and 7GCAs =) Don't have my ticket yet but having fun
+daveyl123 Haha I've never hand propped, (my brother's DLE 111 powered 35% Scale Extra 260 I have) a full scale plane.
+daveyl123 Looking forward to it.
I’ll nit pick a little. The continental 65 is “A-65”, not C65. The C was first used with the 85. When you do an “apples to apples” comparison the Aeronca is superior to the cub in every way. Pressure cowl, larger cabin, solo from the front, faster cruise, oleo gear, fuselage design (three longerons), and more. The big difference is that the cub has a stronger cult following. This is good for champ lovers as the champ prices are typically lower. More bang for your buck. My first airplane was a 7AC champ with the A65. My last was a Citabria 7GCBC with the lycoming O-320, great grand-child of the champ. Both great but for different reasons. The 7GCBC flew more like a truck - very solid feeling. The champ was like a fun go-cart - light, nimble, and surprisingly capable with that “torquey” little A65. I miss them both!
Great Vid!
Yeah, I'm prejudiced, but a Luscombe would be a better choice for less money. But it was the next generation of personal aircraft at the time and that remains true now. I've traveled the country in a Luscombe...and in other, faster aircraft, but there's something about the Luscombe that elevates it beyond the realm of patch flier.
Prices are quite reasonable? lol! When I was a kid you could by J-3's all day long for under 10k....and this was not THAT long ago.
Love the videos, but would like to see a bit of work done post-processing. The Cub segment at the beginning was blown out (over exposed) most times, and the white balance during the Champ section was clearly wrong.
Keep up the great content. May be time to hire someone for post.
You're right. I couldn't filter around the bad camera settings.
Hire someone? Hahahahahahah!
Know much about the economics of free RUclips vids?
Agreed, a little more work on the audio / video quality would have gone a long way here.
Also, I think maybe they could have found a more comparable champ than the one used in this video. The cub was true to form but the champ had upgraded engine, panel, wing tanks, etc..
+AVweb How does AVweb make mony by the way..?
Anson Chappell
You're born either a Cub or a Champ person. It's in the genes and can't be changed...kinda like being "North Up or Course Up" with a GPS! (I'm a Cub girl, through and through. Flying a J-3 is "Perfect Heaven."
I think I love you. :)
Martha Lunken Not really. I always wanted a Champ because they were cheaper, roomier, and had better visibility and landing characteristics. I wound up getting a PA-18-105 instead only because the terms were irresistible and I don't mind trading a little contortion and visibility for better take off performance. Really.. Aeronca, Taylorcraft, Luscombe, Cub, 120/140, even Rans and Kitfox and Murphy... they're all great as long as they are small and have the little wheel at the back.
+Martha Lunken You are one of the few that would appreciate - "which side of the debate Red Stewart would exist" ;) I was fortunate to have spent a bit of time around that character. I really enjoyed the piece in 'Flying' that you did about Harold, Billy, Darrell, Norm, and the others! I grew up in the 70's through the early 90's at I-73. Mini-Coke bottle vending machines, wax coated paper cup spinners on the Curtis Reed's, launching banners, on and on. What a great way to spend a childhood! I was very blessed!
With all due respect, I disagree. I may be in the minority but I love both equally, like one of my kids, I couldn't pick one over the other. They both are dependable, nostalgic, historic flying machines with their own personalities.
@ Martha Lunken.
I disagree. I learned to fly in a Cub but they are overpriced simply because of the name. People pay over the odds just for a brand name when the Champ is as good if not better for half the price.
My heart says Cub but my head says Champ.
So why the heck do cubs sell for so much more than champs? I like the champ better, though there is not much difference between the 2 if powered by an a65. Vis is better in the champ and it is easier to get in and out of.
Good video, but those two Cub landings were pretty bad lol
No injuries + no damage = Good landing.
No such thing as C-65. It's an A-65.
C as in Continental....
Tytus Abrahamson
It's still a Continental A-65....
PDZ1122 Yep,,, A-65. C-75, C-85, and C-90....
Pepsi or Coke? I'll fly what ever's available, though a Luscombe beats em both ;)
Got me 40 hrs, in a champ.
The J3 is made with carbon steel, not cr-mo.
Also J3 had a wood spar the champ was metal. I loved the champ but the J3 was more fun. If I were to own one it would be a champ.
@@RetiredPilot I agree. The champ is a better plane.
Cub vs. Champ? Neither: Taylorcraft, same A-65 engine, honest 95mh cruise.
Nope. I couldn't even get that out of a T Cart with an O-200 in it. If you want to go fast, there are tons of better planes out there. If you want to go slow, tough to beat the fat USA35B and massive tail leverage of a Cub.
No, 95mph (not knots) is typical for a 65HP T-Craft, that's what I saw with mine. But only with the windows closed; opening them cost 10mph.
Taylorcraft A75 110 mph cruise Luscombe 8A fabric wing A65 cruisw 110mph !!!
Elaine 9067 Lima
Sounds like the cub falls hard behind the champ and that’s disappointing. To me reason being I’m born and raised in south central alaska... cubs are as popular and numerous as vape shops.. super cub are all engines baby. Entire plane weighs 750 but it can haul and fly well with a strong 900lbs of dudes and their goodies... well 900 in cold crisp weather..800 maybe a bit less in warm weather...notice I said warm when the land I question is alaska...thanks for reading this..retorting comments welcome and appreciated
Never understood why the j3 sells for $10k more. Champ is much easier to climb in and out of, solo the visibility is WAY better, and it's just as much fun to fly. The bill of materials to build them should be about the same. So people just like the cub more. I don't.
Paul Burrburrally is the champ!
This is the aviation equivalent of Glock vs 1911.
LOL - not quite, more like the 1911 v the Browning HiPower. Although both of those were pretty serious kit back in the day. The modern equivalents of both these things would be ultralights.
a titan tornado with a rotax and that champ ,doing a performance test with the same load that would be a good old vs new comparison
these are not kits
It's an A-65 not a C-65. No such thing
I prefer wheel landings.
A Champion at around $25,000... is not really a bargain way to fly. Not for such an old, wore out plane. For most people, ultralights from the 80's at 1/10th the price of a Champion are going to be the way they get up in the air.
Flew both - the Cub was better.
better at what