The International Cessna^® 170 Association

Well I think it depends on the level of restoration and or what level of authenticity your looking for.

You won't see them everyday but if you put the word out the word they can be found.

Living close by I go to Sentimental Journey fly-in at Lock-haven, PA every year. This is fly-in is like the holy grail of fly-ins if you have a Cub.

There are always a handful of L-4s and the fly-in usually brings out the best. Most are for sale if you want to pay $50,000 for a flying example of an aircraft that would put most museum birds to shame.

Bruce,

I thought about you the other day, I flew my 170 down to Savannah for work and when I got there it was such a nice day I pulled a friends J3 out of the hanger and took it for a trip around the patch. Now that was a great day of flying. I love flying my 170 but there is something about a J3 and to fly both of them back to back was a real treat.

i flew my first and only cub
about 20 years ago.
an airline pilot who grew
up in audabon
(20 mi west of GC)
owned one and let me solo it.
usually anyone that does
has that 'love at first sight'
thing
iowa

J-3's have a very-nearly "open cockpit" kind of exhilaration about them that most airplanes lack.

i see there is in L-3 aeronica in trade a plane.
is there much difference between these and the cub?
why would one buy one or the other?
thanks
dave

Not sure about the L3 stuff, but I have the engine off of my 170 so now the only airplane I have to fly is a J3 and and I must say it is a hoot to fly if you have nowhere to be.

Oh crap. You are opening up a can of worms with that question!!! One of those Ford vs. Chevy things. I also have a Champ and love it but I would like to have a Cub. The Cub needs to be soloed from the rear and has a narrow cockpit. The Champ was pretty much designed to address all the so called short comings of the Cub. Wider fuselage, front seat solo, etc. There are staunch advocates for both.
Champs generally "were" much cheaper to purchase but with the advent of the Sport Pilot catagory, the price of Champs has nearly doubled. A real nice Champ will be $25k and up. Same with the Cub, but they are generally higher priced than Champs for comparable planes.

Keith

Iowa - I flew a 1946 Champ for several years before the C170. The Champ has oleo strut gear dampening versus the elastic cords used on the J3. The brakes of the Champ are cable actuated - the J3 uses a hydraulic bladder (basically out of the Model T) which can fail when brakes are applied with great force. The Champ cockpit is more roomy, less drafty and seems to do better in the rain than the J3. Sitting up forward is also nice. The two aircraft equipped with similar engines perform basically the same - takeoff, climb, landing, fuel consumption, etc. I guess the primary difference would be that the Champ is more comfortable on long cross country flights.

There are pros and cons to both the J3 and Champ. I'm 5'8" and comfortable in the back of either my J3 or my friends Champ. I don't like the front seat in either of them.

If I was shopping and found a good deal on a Champ before a J3 I'd be happy with it or the other way around.

If you want a warbird the L-3 (Champ) or the L-2 (TaylorCraft) will be much cheaper than an L-4 (J-3) in the same condition.

Robert Eilers wrote:... The Champ has oleo strut gear dampening versus the elastic cords used on the J3. The brakes of the Champ are cable actuated - ...

Not picking on your good input...just clarifying it a bit...
The Champ/Chief did not exactly have "oleo" struts. They are actually greased spring-struts. The brakes are not designed to actually stop the plane. They are designed to hold it sorta still while the run-up is performed.

(But they are easier to use at first than the J-3 heel brakes, IMHO.)

gahorn wrote:

Robert Eilers wrote:... The Champ has oleo strut gear dampening versus the elastic cords used on the J3. The brakes of the Champ are cable actuated - ...

Not picking on your good input...just clarifying it a bit...
The Champ/Chief did not exactly have "oleo" struts. They are actually greased spring-struts. The brakes are not designed to actually stop the plane. They are designed to hold it sorta still while the run-up is performed.

(But they are easier to use at first than the J-3 heel brakes, IMHO.)

Please explain why then the Champ and Chief have oil filled struts? If that isn't an "oleo" then what is?

I have always thought of an oleo strut as an air over oil system. I don't believe the Aeronca strut is that sophisticated.
My Stinson L-5 had an oil dampened spring enclosed in a sealed cylinder but it was not referred to as an oleo strut.

George's description of the Aeronca gear strut is technically correct.

Dave Clark wrote:..Please explain why then the Champ and Chief have oil filled struts? If that isn't an "oleo" then what is?

The Aeronca's don't have oil in them. They're not "oleo" struts. They merely have sliding bushings within a steel tube, supported by coil springs, and are greased.
Oleo-struts are nitrogen (or dry air) charged, oil-filled, sealed spring struts. (Nitrogen is preferred because it is inexpensive and will not support oxidation.) They are essentially hydraulic shock-absorbers with a pre-charge of nitrogen, the gas being compressible and therefore the strut is able to telescope/absorb landing and taxi forces. The oil lubricates the mechanism and prevents excessive leakage of the gas.

George,
Do you know where the name Oleo stems from?