-
Top Cub Vs Carbon Cub
I find it interesting for a company founded on the Super Cub spends it time with the Carbon cub? I see very little promotion of the TOP Cub? Is there a reason for that???
S
-
Member
Re: Top Cub Vs Carbon Cub
If you compare the performance data I think you will recognize the reason for the CC11 focus.
-
Senior Member
Re: Top Cub Vs Carbon Cub
Both are outstanding airplanes. If you want to carry a load then Top cub is the choice. If you want spectacular take off and climb, then go Carbon Cub, though a lightly loaded Top cub would be very impressive.
Perhaps the company sees a broader market for the Carbon Cub because it is an LSA.
Regards,
Carl
Last edited by carlconti; 09-02-2013 at 05:00 AM.
-
Senior Member
Re: Top Cub Vs Carbon Cub
Indeed most of our marketing effort is put behind the Carbon Cub these days though rest assured the CC18 Top Cub is alive and well. With limited marketing funds it is difficult to do more than a token job at both so we must make some tough choices with our promotional efforts. Also, since the Top Cub is indeed a DNA relative of the PA18 Super Cub those interested in that airframe tend to know what they are looking for whereas the CC11-based Carbon Cub is newer and less well known. Sport Pilot operation (no FAA medical required) is also a reason the Carbon Cub is so popular these days.
Lastly, as Carl mentioned, there is a fairly significant performance difference, more so than the numbers would lead you to think, primarily due to the much lighter weight of the Carbon Cub (newer technology). As with all machines (cars, motorcycles, etc.) subjective impressions often mean more than numbers on a page. Still, there are some compelling benefits to a Top Cub and we'd be happy to build one for you, in fact we have one in inventory right now, just check our inventory page here.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules