EAAAirVenture OshkoshShopJoin

Pietenpol or cub from plans?

Posted By:
Mike Stineman
Homebuilder or Craftsman
2
Posts
3
#1 Posted: 8/3/2010 21:49:55

I'm selecting my first homebuilt plane project that I will use for low and slow around the neighborhood in rural Iowa. Currently the selection is down to either the pietenpol air camper or the wag aero cub. If you have experience building and/or flying either of these I would appreciate your comments.

Thanks,

Mike S



Gregory Cardinal
Homebuilder or Craftsman
19
Posts
9
#2 Posted: 8/4/2010 12:52:12

Hi Mike,

 

The Pietenpol is the hands-down winner in this contest for the following reasons:

1. Easy to build although perseverance is required.

2. Fantastic builder support through the discussion list at www.matronics.com

3. Easily one of the most crowd pleasing airplanes on the flightline at fly-ins. You will almost always be directed to a parking spot "front and center". There will be a crowd around your Pietenpol most of the time.

4. Flying in an open cockpit on a late summer evening when the air is glass smooth and you are cruising along 100 - 200 feet above the treetops is pure bliss.

5. Super cheap to build and fly.

Go to www.westcoastpiet.com and browse around.

 

Greg Cardinal

Pietenpol Air Camper NX18235



Dave Prizio
Young Eagles Pilot or VolunteerHomebuilder or Craftsman
118
Posts
29
#3 Posted: 8/4/2010 15:32:44

I think it comes down to your personal preferences. Most people build the Pietenpol out of all wood (although there is an alternate steel tube fuselage plan available). The Wag Aero has an all steel tube structure, so part of the decision is welding versus woodworking.  I think the Piet is probably a bit easier to build, since it is a simpler design, but either one can be handled by a first-time builder with some perseverence.

As for flying, the Wag Aero is potentially faster if you go with an O-200 engine. In any case the Wag Aero will be faster than a Piet with the same horsepower. It is just a less draggy airplane.

If you are a big guy, the Wag Aero can be pretty tight on space, especially in front. The Piet at least gives you the option to make some more room for yourself, which would be harder to do with the Wag Aero I think.

My guess is that the Piet can be built for less money, if that is a serious consideration, but it is also going to be worth less if you decide to sell it.

Finally the openness of the Piet can be great fun, but it can also have its drawbacks if the weather turns soggy.

Two fun airplanes. Which one you go with just depends on what you want to do.

Dave Prizio

Texas Sport Cub N114DE



Tom Hackel
Homebuilder or Craftsman
126
Posts
22
#4 Posted: 8/5/2010 01:26:14 Modified: 8/5/2010 01:27:43

Have you seen the Texas Parasol, It look fairly simple and on the same order.

Nice looking plane.

 



Matthew Long
Homebuilder or Craftsman
122
Posts
12
#5 Posted: 8/5/2010 06:14:57

The Pietenpol has a large and vibrant builder community, but there is certainly no shortage of Cub fans and expertise out there as well.  As was already mentioned, unless you go with the welded steel tube Piet fuselage, the biggest difference is the steel and welding requried with the Cub.  There are also workshop size issues as the original Piet' has a single 29' long wing, though there is an optional three-piece wing.  I personally I prefer the open-cockpit ambiance and working with wood, but a Cub is certainly great fun.

Assuming you are looking at two-seat, low-and-slow, high-wing designs, here are a few more to consider:

--Pober Junior Ace (side-by-side open cockpit, wood parasol wing, steel tube fuselage and tail, plans)

--Fisher Flying Products Horizon 1, Horizon 2 (Cub- or Cessna-like high wing, all wood, kit or plans)

--Christavia Mk1/Mk2 (tandem/side-by-side) (steel tube fuselage and tail, wood wing)

I won't go into all the single-seat possibilities, but I should, of course, mention Eric Clutton's FRED, since that's my site!  Good luck and let us know what you decide.

Cheers,

Matthew



******* Matthew Long www.cluttonfred.info
Mike Stineman
Homebuilder or Craftsman
2
Posts
3
#6 Posted: 8/6/2010 21:35:48

Well some interesting comments and good information. I interpret from the comments of this forum that the Pietenpol and cub have similar flying/handling characteristics. The cub (with enclosed cockpit) seems the more logical choice. But the style and intrigue of unlimited visibility in the Pietenpol are very attractive.

Thanks to all of you that have taken time to respond.

Good flying,

Mike S



Dan Yocum
Vintage Aircraft Association Member
5
Posts
1
#7 Posted: 8/9/2010 11:06:55
The piet is faster than a Cub at cruise with the same engine - it's a factor of the airfoil.  The Cub does have a better glide ratio, though.

A Cub is a Cub, there's no denying, but a Piet is pure nostalgia.  In the open cockpit you can smell the fresh cut grass in the summer, the burning leaves in the fall, the frying bacon over the small towns on a early morning dawn patrol.  I wouldn't trade my Piet for a Cub!


John Hartgerink
Homebuilder or CraftsmanAirVenture Volunteer
22
Posts
2
#8 Posted: 8/26/2010 00:50:43

Mike,

   I lead a build team at Oshkosh 10 years ago and built a LMA full size Super cub replica in wood. Fred now has plans for a wood full size cub as well as the Super cub we built. The aircarft is easy to build and if you like working with wood it goes together easy. We (Replica Fighter Assoc.) started with just the 2x6 spruce and milled it all right on site at Oshkosh--in a tent! The first year we built the fuesalage and year two saw us do the wing. The 3rd year we skinned the fuesalage with plywood and then sold the project to a RFA member. It was damaged beyound repair by the new owner in his hanger--he ran into it with a fork lift!   Aircraft spruce sells the plans and kits--however you do not need the kits. Just follow Freds info and get the lumber and mill/cut it yourself.

John Hartgerink



Nicholas Montei
Young Eagles Pilot or VolunteerHomebuilder or Craftsman
4
Posts
0
#9 Posted: 8/26/2010 06:09:39

Have you checked out Airdrome Airplanes WW1 replicas? Perfect fun low and slow planes, easy build (400 hours) and affordable. Also you will get a large draw at the flyins.  Also you have a little fighter to play with!

Nick