Stock Taylorcraft BC12D vs. Stock Luscombe 8A

[barnstmr]

I saw the conversation below on the Luscombe forum and thought it would be fun to share on this forum to prod the friendly and healthy debate over which is the better airplane. We may never put this to bed, but I like hearing from others what they like and dislike about their airplanes. By the way... I am gonna quiz Ron to see what makes him say the Luscombe is LOTs more fun? It has been a few years since I flew a Luscombe, but I have flown both and I beg to differ!!!

***********************************

Re: Engine Change SB


Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:57 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Sharon Tinkler" luscombesfly
Yep. Four luscombes flying from Matoon to Blakesburg - Ron out ran us all.
Sharon
On Jul 18, 2012, at 7:54 PM, Ron Shank wrote:

> OK, I'll say it. 105 mph 65hp Luscombe. And if you don't want to believe me ask Dan and Bill and Sharon. We spent a week flying around together several years back and I think they will confirm it.
>
> Ron Shank
> '39 8A

Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:43 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Gary Caron" gullman88
At 2150 RPM and a 47" pitch prop the theoretical maximum speed of an airscrew through the air is 95 MPH at 100% efficiency. No airplane, even the slippery little Luscombe flies with zero drag. Therefore nobody is flying at 105 mph at 2150 rpm unless they have a steeper pitch prop and if they do they must have more HP than 65 to make it turn fast enough to do any good.
Best Regards,
Gary A. Caron

Wed Jul 18, 2012 6:25 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Daniel Hall" skyboltone
Ooops, no, here he is etc

Well anyway. No matter. I'll go where I go and have fun doing it. DanH

Wed Jul 18, 2012 6:19 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Daniel Hall" skyboltone
I guess I'll have to sneak over there some night and put a couple bags of ready mix under his seat sling. Here he is on a cool spring morning at 10,200' in and out no problem. This density altitude is so high his 6.00 x 6 tyres blowed up. Dan H

Wed Jul 18, 2012 6:08 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Ron Shank" luscomberon2
I had a 65hp T-craft before I got my first Luscombe. It was better for getting in and out of cow pastures than the Luscombe. I have flown both out of a friends 1000' strip I would guess the T-craft was off the ground in around 500', the Luscombe about 700'. Grass strip, 2300' elevation. Once airborne there is little comparison on "fun factor". The Luscomber is just LOTS more fun.

Ron

--- On Wed, 7/18/12, Daniel Hall wrote:

From: Daniel Hall
Subject: Re: [luscombe-silvaire] Re: Engine Change SB
To: [email protected]
Date: Wednesday, July 18, 2012, 3:10 PM

I don't care how fast I go really. If I can go one mph faster than my friend in his 65 hp T-cart I'll be happy. The more pressing question is can I get in and out as short as he can? Probably not but we do have about 3.5 months a year where density altitude is pretty bad. It's 7750' out there today. With a 754 empty weight and 23 gallons and my skinny 155lb butt in the seat how badly is he going to beat me?

By the way, I just got word that the airplane is ready today. Engine SMOH 185, 1 since SB96-11B teardown and crank replacement (standard bearings!! Crank m-fluxed for good measure before new yellow tag)

I want to make sure I'm not going to wad it up before I put any cosmetic money into it but this winter I hope to open the wings for new 11.5 gallon wing tanks so I can have a hat shelf for one thing.....we'll see......I definitely hear the roar coming about not tearing up an airworthy bird.

DanH
1940 Luscombe 8C NC28751 (75hp and unknown prop)

[Ragwing nut]

Re: Stock Taylorcraft BC12D vs. Stock Luscombe 8A

Luscombe is definitely more comfortable, and I prefer the stick. both have pros and cons. That being said I have out run several 8A's and they are never happy as I stroll by!

[M Towsley]

Re: Stock Taylorcraft BC12D vs. Stock Luscombe 8A

The Luscombe has the stick that I like, but every one I was in had lousy seats and hurt my back over a short period of time. They have a bad rep for ground handling that none of the ones I flew had. Bad gas gauge locations and it sounds like you are sitting at the large end of a megaphone when on the ground, (because you are). And, each one was faster than my Taylorcrafts. Mike must be cheating somehow!

[jim cooper]

Re: Stock Taylorcraft BC12D vs. Stock Luscombe 8A

The Luscombe has the stick that I like, but every one I was in had lousy seats and hurt my back over a short period of time. They have a bad rep for ground handling that none of the ones I flew had. Bad gas gauge locations and it sounds like you are sitting at the large end of a megaphone when on the ground, (because you are). And, each one was faster than my Taylorcrafts. Mike must be cheating somehow!

I owned an 8A Luscombe in the 80's for a short time. It flew like all light aircraft with a tailwheel. The stick is nicer. THEN I borrowed an 8F which is 90 hp, cruises at around 110 to 115. This is a GREAT airplane and with wheel pants GOOD LOOKING. Ground handling is like all the rest. In the air it will pass a BC12D like its standing still. Lots of fun! A NICE one is 35,000.00 maybe a little more. WORTH IT! (its not LSA) JC

[Ragwing nut]

Re: Stock Taylorcraft BC12D vs. Stock Luscombe 8A

I never said it was perfect. I really hate the bar in my back on the "B". I have no desire to own an 8A, but if an 8E or 8F presented itself, it might be hard to deny.