The Ultimate M4 Build......

Trigear? Taildragger? Fixed pitch prop? Which Engine? ...anything related with model selection considerations and questions about buying a Maule
truthinbeer
100+ Posts
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:24 pm
Location: Sydney Australia
Contact:

Post by truthinbeer »

MauleMechanic wrote: I can still dream of a Maule with a 185 Warner if'n I wanna
No need to dream Bryan. You can slip in a modern Aussie variant...Rotec in 7 or 9 cylinders. http://www.rotecradialengines.com/

User avatar
Hottshot
100+ Posts
Posts: 995
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:41 pm
Location: 4S3
Contact:

Post by Hottshot »

MikeW wrote:In today's FAA climate, how does one get an experimental tag so easily on a Maule by just modifying it with a wish list of parts. The Cub guys seem to be able to do this as well. What am I missing?

Mike
It sounds easier than it is.... You have to build 51% or more so what I would do is pull the fuse a part add a few inches mod ext baggage, build a set of wings etc.... Not just a put it together and call it exp.

User avatar
cooker
100+ Posts
Posts: 133
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:02 pm
Contact:

Post by cooker »

Wup any progress here ????

I find myself in need of somthing like this. The floatplane is great as a float plane but i now need big wheels and don't want to take off the floats as there is still a need for them as well.

There are M4's M5's around that would fit the bill but i sure like being experimental and wish to stay there if at all possible.

User avatar
aero101
100+ Posts
Posts: 2145
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:18 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
Contact:

Post by aero101 »

You must build 51% period... There is a checklist AC that lists all the various percentages, and you must be able to check off 51%... With the mods you're talking, plus whatever you can do to airframe, plus whatever wings you put on, should easily make the 51%... And don't forget those tail surfaces you had to manufacture, recover of total airplane, Titanium Firewall, etc, etc... If you comply with the requirements per FAR, you should have no problem certifying as experimental. I have done a couple of these, and it's a piece of cake, but you have to research requirements, do all the paper work required, and you should have no problem from FAA at that point. I have heard it stated that you can't make an existing manufactured aircraft into an experimental... This is just NOT TRUE, if FAA should tell you that. As a simple example, you're working to approve a seaplane prop for an STC. This prop will require a noise survey, how do you fly off this survey when new prop not on TCDS or otherwise approved? You simply apply for an experimental AW cert, it gets issued, and now you can legally fly airplane. The whole key to successfully making exp is your documentation, doc absolutely everything that is other then original and has been done by you... Make that list as lonnnnggggg as possible... And take lots of pics documenting work... :)
Jim
http://www.northstar-aero.com

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

pilot
100+ Posts
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 12:24 pm
Location: Central LA
Contact:

Post by pilot »

The 1911 checklist is very detailed as to what percentage of a plane part counts toward 51%, or an E-AB type. You can get a couple of other experimental TC's, but there are restrictions (exhibition, restricted class). The best is the E-AB, where you are legal to work on it yourself. Like Jim said you must document everything, pictures, receipts, logs......it can be done.
I can't remember if I fired six shots, or only five.....


M-5 220c, circa 1974
EAA #428061

MikeW
100+ Posts
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:02 pm
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Post by MikeW »

Other than the droop tip, is there much difference in the universal wing on an M4 compared to an M5 wing.

Also, still considering an engine swap from the CIO360 to a lycoming O360. Does anyone have any experience doing this.

Mikew

User avatar
Hottshot
100+ Posts
Posts: 995
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:41 pm
Location: 4S3
Contact:

Post by Hottshot »

well I am still in parts gather mode and getting the wrinkles ironed out before I get into the "build" part. 8)

User avatar
aero101
100+ Posts
Posts: 2145
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:18 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
Contact:

Post by aero101 »

MikeW wrote:Other than the droop tip, is there much difference in the universal wing on an M4 compared to an M5 wing.

Also, still considering an engine swap from the CIO360 to a lycoming O360. Does anyone have any experience doing this.

Mikew
Yes, we've done that conversion up here. You will need lots of the O360 stuff such as engine mount, cowling is different but can be modified to work if you have Fiberglass experience and time, Exh Sys, and quite a bit of nickel dime stuff... Easiest if you can find a salvage M4-180 that has good firewall forward as not sure what this would cost all new parts from Maule? You will also need an O-360-C1F or C4F as those are the only 2 approved engines. We converted an earlier, I think A1B, by just changing sump and intake tubes to C1F/C4F style... Anyway it can certainly be done...
Jim
http://www.northstar-aero.com

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

MikeW
100+ Posts
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:02 pm
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Post by MikeW »

Thanks Jim. In your opinion, if the h.p. was boosted with some upgrades to cylinders, exhaust, climb prop etc...would the takeoff distances be similar?

Mikew

G-MAWL
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 12:22 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

IO360

Post by G-MAWL »

Why would you bother ?

I got 2600 hours from mine and it was still performing okay after 25 years. 1500 of those hours was hauling gliders !
One top overhaul. Replaced a cracked cylinder. Nice smooth engine.

Derek

User avatar
aero101
100+ Posts
Posts: 2145
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 1:18 pm
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
Contact:

Post by aero101 »

The O-300 does ok, but I think you'd see a substantial improvement with the 180HP as it's lighter and is something over 20% horsepower boost. That said, a fresh O-300, with decent exhaust, and 80" of climb prop with around 40-42" pitch would probably be very noticeable improvement. And it'd be a lot less work and probably less $$$ as well...
Jim
http://www.northstar-aero.com

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

pilot
100+ Posts
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 12:24 pm
Location: Central LA
Contact:

Post by pilot »

Continental IO-360 to Lycoming O-360 is what we are talking about?

MikeW
100+ Posts
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:02 pm
Location: Alaska
Contact:

Post by MikeW »

Yes for clarification it was the continental IO360 to a Lycoming O360.

Mike W

pilot
100+ Posts
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 12:24 pm
Location: Central LA
Contact:

Post by pilot »

I kinda like the Conti IO-360, it's like a Franklin but with parts still available.

If I were to ditch the Franklin, it would be for an O-540, a (C)IO-360, or an O-360 in that order.

User avatar
chris erasmus
100+ Posts
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:15 am
Location: South Africa
Contact:

Post by chris erasmus »

Please pardon my ignorance, but what makes the M4 so special?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests