STOL w/Tundra Tires: High Country Explorer or Scout?

T

tkearns

New member
I have an 01 7GCBC and find myself wanting more tire to soften my off field landings and improve landing and TO performance. I can't yet bring myself to buy a super-cub but that notion is growing on me. My 3 Options include outfitting my 160HP with the tires and taking whatever I get from a performance standpoint or going with either 180HP HC Explorer or a Newere Scout (both of these would end up with 31's). In spite of the fixed pitch prop, the book numbers seem to favor the 180 hp explorere on TO and cruise. Interested to see of anyone has flown both in and out of tight spots and which you'd feel most comfortable flying. Also interested in knowing the true differences between the 160 hp lyc and the 180 hp Superior on the 7BGCBC. Is there there a notable difference? I will be flying the scout in a few weeks but I hear they are "trucky" when compared to the explorere. Thanks in advance and hope to see many of you in Columbia.

TK
 
Check out some of my post as far as Mod's and performance. Me and my 7GCBC would of finished 13th in the Bush Class at Valdez this year if, I would not of landed 8 inches shy of the line this year( 161 take off and 170 landing), and I think out of the 25 all where cubs, besides 4 maule guys and I. Oh, I only had 4 hours this year in my plane, and next year I will do better and I'm going to lose some weight in my plane. Winning cub, 1020 pounds, Paul weighs 160 pounds, my plane was 1340 and I was down to 230. I have my plane down to 1319 and I'm down to 224 with about 10 more pounds to go(started at 252 this year). Putting in light weight interior this winter also. Had almost half tanks of fuel compared to thier maybe legal fuel. Anyway, technique will go along way, I have 31" bush wheels but would buy 29's if I had to do it again(I think I get to much elavator wash out cause of tires and stall speed and angle of attack changed from my 29" gar aero's). The 29" gar aero fly much better but the 31's handles big rocks allot better. Bought myself another pair of used 29" gar aero's today.

Oh, by the way most of the top cubs dont have no electrical systems or vacuum systems with intruaments, vor, gps, or interiors, wide back seat, like my Citabria does.

Most, Important for take off, get a prop, I run a 8040 but prob would suggest a 8042 if your not a bush pilot like I think I am(LOL).

Terry
 
I can say was not my tires that created my problem, and I aint saying was an experiment removing flap seals cause thats not totally legal, but can tell you they help. Here is a link to my plane with 31's in some rocks. Biggist rock, had to dodge 18 inches tall even though most of the biggest rocks where 6 to 9 inches. http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/album.php?albumid=243&pictureid=10581

Terry
 
Well, realize that a stripped down Scout is a High Country Explorer with bigger wings and taller gear. Performance numbers are better because the HC 7GCBC has a lower gross weight. So, if you flew a Scout at that weight.....

Lets just say the water bomber with no water in it was a rocket. The reverse when you add 900 lbs of water. haha
 
Thanks Gents...bought a HC Explorer and will do some reading before choosing between 29's and 31's. Will hold off on the prop...if I need that I'll go with a carbon cub...sorry for the swear word.
 
When the plane arrives it will get 31's. Will soon run straight against same year, simialarly equipped scout (with vg's and 31's) with the same amount of fuel to compare performance and will report back. Won't mean much to most of you as there were apparently only 28 HC Explorers built but what the hell. Thanks guys...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top