Model Difference

gbarrier · Post by **gbarrier** » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:40 pm

I am looking for my first Maule. Love my old 100hp champ but need 4 seats. Fly off of about 1400 ft of grass with power line over one end but a nice gap in the trees t the other so almost any Maule would work.

Have been looking at a few M-6 models. I feel that I would prefer the longer wings/flaps as compared to the M-5. Am I wrong here? Also I see that the first M-6 models have less aileron (span and chord) compared to the B model as well as compared to an M7. Is there any handicap with that? Headroom is also a consideration as my son and I are both pretty tall. Any suggestions there?

Obviously I would like a 235, everyone wants one that "leap tall buildings in a single bound". I'm not above using Mogas to keep the cost of flying down but see few advertised with the B4B5 engine. What was the criteria for each engine?

What have I missed here? Thanks for all advice.

MauleMechanic · Post by **MauleMechanic** » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:36 pm

gbarrier wrote:I am looking for my first Maule. Love my old 100hp champ but need 4 seats. Fly off of about 1400 ft of grass with power line over one end but a nice gap in the trees t the other so almost any Maule would work.

Have been looking at a few M-6 models. I feel that I would prefer the longer wings/flaps as compared to the M-5. Am I wrong here? Also I see that the first M-6 models have less aileron (span and chord) compared to the B model as well as compared to an M7. Is there any handicap with that? Headroom is also a consideration as my son and I are both pretty tall. Any suggestions there?

Obviously I would like a 235, everyone wants one that "leap tall buildings in a single bound". I'm not above using Mogas to keep the cost of flying down but see few advertised with the B4B5 engine. What was the criteria for each engine?

What have I missed here? Thanks for all advice.

The M5 M6 is a better Bush plane platform, better landing and take-off as well. The short wing does not float like the long wings do. The M7 is a Cadillac compared to the M5-6. However, taller folks may need more headroom given in the M7 (not the MX-7) which has lower seat brackets and a tad higher headliner. Looking at photographs at the trailing edge of the wing, you can see the taller structure design by a few inches for the rear seats. Can't beat the 235 B4B5....only seldom do I find a fuel injected that runs as smooth. Stay away from all the gizmo stuff in the cockpit, fly the airplane and keep your eyes outside. The more junk inside, the longer the runway needed to get off the ground.

MauleWacko · Post by **MauleWacko** » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:57 pm

gbarrier · Post by **gbarrier** » Mon Dec 23, 2013 3:26 pm

So what i'm getting is that the m-5, m-6, and MX series are the same fuse as far as room inside. Is that true? How about the possibility that the M-7 seat mounts allow them to sit a little lower. If so, can the m-5/6 mounts be lowered to match or changed out?

aero101 · Post by **aero101** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 4:43 pm

The M5 / MX7 / MT7 are all same fuselages, only MT has TW at wrong end... The M6 is more or less same as M7 then what the M5 is, and I believe the M6 to be best performer in bunch if you can deal with the shorter ailerons / Xwinds which can be a little more challenging then the universal wings now used on MX7, M7.... For in / out heavy work, M6 hard to beat!!! Matter of fact some old time Maule Bush guys up here will tell you M6 best Bush Maule ever made!! This also assumes that you're talking the MX7 with universal wing, long flaps started production around '96?... The '94 and prior MX7 has shorter wings, flaps, etc similar to M5... Faster airplanes, but I don't see anywhere near same STOL performance with shorter wing unless you had a very light M5. Same old story, many airplanes out there, do many things well, but none I know of that will shine in all performance regimes, unless you're a hell of a pilot!!

I would suggest you have a long conversation with Jeremy who intimately knows all these models, discuss what you want to do with it, how much you've got to spend on investment, operating costs, etc... AS there are substantial differences other then HP?

Whatever you decide on, the least of my worry would be seating height as there are kits avail from maule, creative engineering with seat bottom / backs, and last resort to build something that fits you, and get a field approval... I think you will find Jeremy knowledgable on this subject as well, probably more so then anyone on this forum...

gbarrier · Post by **gbarrier** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 5:59 pm

Thanks for good advice. Makes lots of sense. Can't seem to find Jody. just might be the airplane.

gbarrier · Post by **gbarrier** » Tue Dec 24, 2013 6:09 pm

Also, is there a reasonable life limit on the wing? Considering a fairly high time airplane. Saw logbook entry about replacing loose rivets and stop drilling some cracks.

Mountain Doctor · Post by **Mountain Doctor** » Wed Dec 25, 2013 10:40 am

There is no time limit on the airframe. It's inspected and cleared on condition.

formerpacerdriver · Post by **formerpacerdriver** » Thu Dec 26, 2013 1:57 pm

Based on the last 3 annuals on my M-6, stop-drilling is 'normal', especially on the wing in the prop wash area. That area takes a beating at low airspeed/high power situations. However, only a few spots needed "repair" beyond the stop-drill.

TomD · Post by **TomD** » Thu Dec 26, 2013 4:47 pm

I am not sure but I am guessing the M6 still had the 0.020 skins on the wings
as the M5 did.

I had a number of cracks around the rivets due to propwash vibration etc. especially on the right side. Was running a two blade prop until then and moved to three blade in 2000.

I re-skinned the wings w/ 0.025 in 2000 and had no cracks since.

TD

Model Difference

Model Difference

Re: Model Difference

Rivets

stop drills

Who is online