What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Thinking about a Maule?.

grubbat

Well Known Member
Thinking about a Maule?.

After enjoying the RV-3 for a while and now soaking up the RV-6a, I find myself looking over at my hanger pal?s Maule 180C. Yes we can both take off in ~400ft but he is able to do it with a passenger and still clear the trees. Yes we both can land in ~400, but he can do it with a passenger with a load of cargo and stuff.

When we go on trips looking for a grass field to land or pancakes to eat, either I back it down to 110mph or head on alone and wait for them to show up. Flying at 110mph is ok but my -6a is begging for the magic Carson number. I brag on how fast I can get there and eat up all the pancakes before they get there and he tells me he is tired of going fast and enjoys going slow and soaking up God?s creation along the way. He gets to go fast during his day job. I change the subject.

When debating safety stuff, he is quick to remind me that being upside down on the ground is difficult in a RV vs a Maule. I quickly come back that I don?t intend to be upside down but his point is made deep in my brain. Vern?s friend had an upside encounter a couple of miles north of me at KFFC in a -6 so I concede that my tip-up may not be better upside down than his high-wing truck. My Maule friend points out that Maule?s don?t have in-flight break-ups at the same frequency of RV?s. I am quick to come back that my nose-wheel insurance is ~$800.00 per year and his tail wheel Maule is around twice that. He changes the subject.

At the end of the day, my current mission is a two-place-almost-do-everything RV6a, but a pickup in the sky is temping.

Looking around I see on one side of the hanger that ready-to-fly-low-and-slow-pickup truck-Maule. On the other side of the hanger, on a lonely table all by itself, I see those Bearhawk plans begging for attention along with 2000hr - 3000hr plus building time. At my age, 2000 hr is eternity.

And then I look at my RV and I wonder out loud when Van?s going to get in the low-and-slow-utility game. After pondering this for a while and dozing off staring at the bearhawk drawings, I put those drawings away and climb in the -6a for an evening of smooth flying. I?m glad I?m flying instead of building. The thoughts of selling my -6a for a Maule fade away as I get lost high above the trees and admire the sunset one more day at 6000ft.

Thanks for a great design Van?s. Now, get started on that high-wing-pickup-truck so I can sell my bearhawk plans?..
 
Give Walter Smith a call. I will PM you his contact info. He has an outstanding low time Maule that he would like to sell.

Once he sells it he will be in the market for a RV12.

Regards,
 
Interesting thoughts.

I flew a MX7180a for about 12 years. Sold it almost 2 years ago when I finished my '10. I have to say I love my '10 and would never go back.... but there are a lot of sweet memories there.

That said, the Maule flies like a truck compared to the '10 let alone a '6. Trips are long at 110knots (I could get 113 when the engine was fresh but she dropped down to 110 by 1600 hours), but the scenery is great. We've taken 4 with bags from NC to FL in the Maule but we knew each other really well. On the other hand, 2 people and an obscene amount of stuff can be hauled in and out of just about anywhere. With the back seats out, "Oh sure, we'll bring the Christmas tree and the dog with us". It's not just how much it can carry but the size of the door hole!

I remember someone trying to sell me on building a Bearhawk. Looking at the numbers and the configuration I concluded the Bearhawk is a Maule (helmet on). Hopefully it's a bit more nimble simply due to the lack of certification but the Maule is rock stable and easy to fly once the tail wheel thing is worked out.

Our mission is travel and the '10 is better than we ever could have expected. But if we were mainly doing burgers and sight seeing, we'd really miss the Maule.

If you really want to screw up your mind, and perhaps your hangar mate's, take the Maule up with any one of the doors off. It's legal for that. Open cockpit flying at it's best. At 7:00am on a cool calm morning it's just too nice.

Nice Maule dreams!
 
The most RV-like highwing bushplane...

I'd rather have a Glasair Sportsman than a Maule.
First of all, it's an E-AB like an RV... cruise speeds almost getting up to RV-9 speeds, takeoff and land in very short fields, and still haul around quite a bit of stuff. If Van ever designs a highwing, he should have the Sportsman square in his sights as the competition to beat.
 
Flying a Maul

If you want to camp car style (Iron skillets etc) the Maul is the way to go but the fuel burn really hurts.

Rather fly the 7 with hiking gear!
 
maule

I am currently working on Glassair sportsman 2+2 and have my Maule for sale. Neither are a replacement for our RV 8a.The Maule's are a fun airplane of a different type compared to a RV. Ron
 
I've owned two Maules. a 78 and then an 80 M5-235C. Put over 800 hours on them. Always wanted more power and speed!!! Take off and land on a dime when you learn how to do it properly, almost scary but the power pulls you through. 14 gal/hr fuel burn, mostly 93 auto gas, 24/24 sq. 7500' yields 140 mph. Put 66 gal in it, 4- 200+ pounders and go. An amazing plane. Its just a newer version of a piper pacer with a metal wing and a few improvements. Fit and finish are austere, seats suck, but you can land it anywhere and you can get it out too. You will learn to use your feet real fast. It's basically a 50's airplane with a big motor but fun to fly. I still miss mine sometimes. I do love my RV9, it is an amazing plane, and fits my mission perfectly 90% of the time, but there are those days when I want to land in that clearing or ranch road I see down there and can't because I'll tear up the wheel pants and those itty bitty tires will catch a hole or rut and flip me on my head.

PS: If you decide to buy one, go all the way for the big motor. If you don't you will wish later that you did - I promise that.
 
As a Glasair Sportsman builder and a guy surrounded by RV's at home base, I can appreciate the utility of both aircraft. As my RV9A friend states... if we decide to go airplane camping, he'll get there ahead of us and will have the campsite picked out, ready to set up the gear that I'm hauling in the Sportsman. :)

Seriously, if you want utility and speed and don't want to spend the hours building, used GlaStars represent pretty terrific value right now. With a 180hp engine and C/S prop they won't perhaps be quite as STOL as the Maule but not far off, and will give much better top end speed. If you want 4 seats then the Sportsman is hard to beat.

As for a 180, well, I've been involved with 180's and 185's and figure I can operate three Sporstman's for the price of a single 180's maintenance costs. A $4K annual was pretty much normal with the 180, add another grand or two for a 185 annual. Don't even ask what it cost to annual the Beaver. I should qualify these were all working airplanes so in non-rev service those costs are likely considerably lower, but still considerably higher than the costs of maintaining a Sportsman.
 
PS: If you decide to buy one, go all the way for the big motor. If you don't you will wish later that you did - I promise that.
I assume that may be true. I expected it with my 180. Didn't happen.

May be a east/west thing - SL versus high altitude fields. Big engine is an expensive way to push that barn door faster thru the sky. Only time I wanted a bigger engine was when trying to outclimb ice but that is obviously out of synch with a proper Maule mission. I always wanted a CS prop but the fixed pitch is simple and cheap.

A bigger engine is definitely more better. I love my IO540. But even the 160hp Maule is fun. They are never fast.
As long as the wind is straight down the deck, it's "OK"... Crosswinds however...
not so much...
...but that's where the fun is!

Seriously, after 12 years in the Maule, I found the RV10 so easy to fly and land that I didn't make a single less-than-just-about-a-greaser landing for the first 180 hours in the first 12 months. The '10 is really easy to land but now I've started to bump them on, even bounced it once. The Maule spell is slowly lifting....

I'd really like to fly a Sportsman sometime... everyone seems to really like them.
 
H.P.

I am with maule driver regarding hp. I have 180 hp. with constant speed prop. That gives you 1060 lbs payload with the lighter engine.With floats or hardcore bush flying probably a different story. I have not had any problems with crosswind but have not tried anything greater than 25 mph. I switch back and forth between the Maule and RV 8 quite often and one must remind themselves at about base leg which plan to use as they are a lot different to land. Ron
 
Don's Forget the Pacer!

...Snipped... An amazing plane. Its just a newer version of a piper pacer with a metal wing and a few improvements. Fit and finish are austere, seats suck, but you can land it anywhere and you can get it out too. You will learn to use your feet real fast. It's basically a 50's airplane with a big motor but fun to fly.....Snipped.....

This post was a perfect segue into my response. The Maule is a very capable plane, as most agree. However, if you are looking for the best bang for your utilitarian $$, you need to look seriously at the Piper Pacer!

Here are some reasons: (using older Maules as a reference to stay with the 150/180 HP, FP prop)

1. Cost of acquisition: Even a stellar Pacer can be had for price much less than the average older Maule.
2. Easier to keep maintained: There are two very active owners groups (Short Wing Piper Club, and Short Wing Pipers.Org) that provide a plethora of information for techniques, and advice flying, and fixing the Short Wing Piper.
3. Ready Parts Supply: The fact that all SWP's are related to the Super Cub and it's predecessors, means that there has always been a ready supply of parts. There are new OEM parts available and many STC's for upgrades.
4. Great useful load: My PA-20 weighs in at 1030#, and I have the increased G/W to 1900#. This allows my bride and I to load up the plane with gear through the spacious back door, and the cavernous cargo area with the rear seat removed. Even with the plane full of our gear, we are within CG and can carry a good load of fuel.
5. Let's honest....The Pacer is a darn fine looking plane. And, when you are out with your bud's, you don't want to not look good!
 
High wing

8 years later…. Bought a M4 project ….. tired of waiting on Vans.,,,, but still got the Flying carpet -9 though. Got to keep it RV related ya know.
 
LOL!

I actually remember reading the original post :) I was flying the RV-8 I had built and had started building my Bearhawk thinking "Nah, it won't take that long to build my Bearhawk. What's he thinkin'?"

Here we are, 8 years later, and the Bearhawk isn't done. Another couple of years to go.

I lost my mind a few years back and sold the -8 then quickly realized I needed something to fly so I used the proceeds to buy a Maule M5-235C. I least I followed your advice and got the big engine :)
 
You just need two airplanes The perfect combination. My 1959 piper tri-pacer and harmon rocket. I bought the tri gear version to teach my daughter to fly. I love the looks of the t/w pacers and someday will probably either buy one or convert mine. There is not a better bang for your buck flying.
 

Attachments

  • 18CB7FA8-BE18-470B-9661-9DAF9D9238FA.jpg
    18CB7FA8-BE18-470B-9661-9DAF9D9238FA.jpg
    271 KB · Views: 136
Tri-Pacer

That is indeed a great combination!! The Tri-Pacer is a really underrated aircraft.

My cousin has a Pacer and likes everything about it except landing it. He prefers grass, as it is not a particularly forgiving taildragger. They are beautiful, in my view; really classic.

You just need two airplanes The perfect combination. My 1959 piper tri-pacer and harmon rocket. I bought the tri gear version to teach my daughter to fly. I love the looks of the t/w pacers and someday will probably either buy one or convert mine. There is not a better bang for your buck flying.
 
The tri pacer has land-o-matic installed. Get over the numbers, pull the power and it lands right there. Hehehe
 
Back
Top