# Roomy high wing options?

### Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

#### Bill-Higdon

##### Well-Known Member
The Stallion looks like the love child of a 210, a 177, and a straight tail 172. What a nice looking airplane.

#### Victor Bravo

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
McRae beat me to mentioning the Hollman Stallion.

What about the O'Neill Magnum? I don't know how big it is but I believe it was larger than your average airplane... in the dense fog of my mind, I seem to remember something about putting a 4 x 8 sheet of wood in it or something.

There was a Canadian "homebuilt" version of the Cessna 180, the Cyclone, but I doubt that is 4 foot wide.

What is the actual mission and reason for what you want to achieve?

#### bazzasbede4c

##### New Member
Is there any truly roomy high wing experimental options that cruise around 150mph?

Ideally I’d like something 48”+ wide, cantilevered high wing for easy egress, good useful load to actually fill all the seats. Ideally a 4 seater. Cruise at 150mph to get places yet docile to fly slow.

The closest I can think of would be to scratch build a bearhawk and modify the fuselage to add more width. That still don’t make it a cantilevered wing. And most likely it won’t cruise that fast after widening it.
Try a bede 4c with an updated wing set like that built on the RV AIRCRAFT. you can play around with what you get to start with and add as you go along. by using The RV wings they are all flying and tested. just a thought

#### Attachments

• 72.9 KB Views: 23
• 55.4 KB Views: 21

#### Mitchell

##### Active Member
The Mrs won’t ride in the average sized kit plane. I’d vastly appreciate something roomier myself. That’s so far not a deal breaker on my zenith as it’s only a 2 seater. But ideally I want for us to take vacations together where I fly us somewhere. Along with picking up my parents so something easy to get in and out of is important for them.

I’m not after stol performance or RV speeds. Just a easy to get in and out, comfortable, plane with decent performance. Even if it took a larger engine I’m kinda surprised by the hole in the market place for a kit plane like that. After all the best selling lsa kit is currently the zenith 750 cruzer with a 50” cabin. And the best selling certified plane is the cirrus with 49”. People will pay for comfort myself included.

#### Victor Bravo

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
The Cardinal really does everything I want yet I just don’t want a certificate plane. Even if building cost more I’d rather build it myself and actually have a new plane.
What about rebuilding a wore-out Cardinal with one of the aluminum V8 conversions? That would give you almost a new airplane, and you wouldn't have to worry about it being certified anymore

You could use components from other existing airplanes, cobble them together, and have what you want to wind up with. Get a steel tube fuselage and tails from a Stinson gullwing, and the wing from a Piper Apache, and get an LS V8 with all of Ross Farnham's fuel and ignition stuff, , and have the engineering and welding done so that the cantilever wing loads are put into the fuselage correctly, remove the engine nacelles and sheet over the leading edge to give you a clean wing, and you'd have something that might just possibly qualify as E-AB, but with less build time and less engineering cost.

#### Mitchell

##### Active Member
I’ve considered making something to fit my mission. A coworker is an aeronautical engineer and would go over everything if I drew up plans. He’s not quite keen on having his name on something so I’d be grateful just for the look over. But it would most likely be a blend of a extra wide bearhawk and an rv10.

I was just hoping for a kit I haven’t heard of before. To not reinvent the wheel.

Last edited:

#### cluttonfred

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
The new, even bigger Bearhawk 5 has been mentioned, that one is 44.5 inches at the shoulders and you could easily bulge the doors and windows for a few more inches and no need to design from scratch. I know you said cantilever, but that single strut seems well out of the way to me.

It more than meets your performance needs if you want to fly a taildragger, the only down side I see is the need for a 250-300 hp IO-540 or 315 hp IO-580 or something similar. With that much airplane I'd be tempted to go with a big auto conversion.

#### TFF

##### Well-Known Member
I get making it yourself, but at 4 place or more, it is cheaper to buy certified. So many good deals ready to go. A Bearhawk will cost $80,000 without your labor. If it’s scratch and you have anything else in your life going on; it’s ten years down the road. You know what it took to do your Zenith. RV 10 to my numbers is a way to get a Cirrus for$100k less. Still not necessarily cheap. Real travel with 4 really means you need 6, to not struggle. It’s also a plane that you probably won’t love. You will know if people really will travel with you or not pretty quick. It’s a good thought,but a 182 now will see how it really goes. A friend bought a 310 for \$35k and is putting in G5s and a couple of other upgrades. He flew it to Yosemite from Kentucky two years ago with wife, daughter , and son in law. Wife does not travel lean.

#### mcrae0104

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
per their website, Stallion kits are no longer available
Per their website, the prototype is available for sale.

#### mcrae0104

##### Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
I get making it yourself, but at 4 place or more, it is cheaper to buy certified.
I recall giving you a hard time for recommending certified planes on HBA.com once upon a time, TFF. Now I see the wisdom of an off-the-shelf plane as a stopgap until you can build the plane you really want.

#### dog

##### Well-Known Member
I once did a comparison of a whole bunch of
aircraft,'regular" planes and oddball specialty
and cargo planes of roughly similar weights anf
power,and at from that came to the conclusion
that there was not any great penalty in performance for a much larger airframe,enough obviously to impact comercial
pointy pencil calculation.
So exra wide cantilevered high wing supper roomy,day triper camper plane with an LS motor,big fold up doors so two people can
rumage for there stuff at the same time,
cup holders,mirror in the glove box.

#### b7gwap

##### Well-Known Member
If you re-engine a Cardinal and do it right, you could get your money back selling the STC… just saying

HBA Supporter

#### Rhino

##### Well-Known Member
...99.9% want a homebuilt to be a fighter and the other 10% want a STOL. There is always the 5% who want an inflatable airplane...
Is that kinda like the 90% complete, 90% still to go?

#### Rhino

##### Well-Known Member
The new, even bigger Bearhawk 5 has been mentioned, that one is 44.5 inches at the shoulders and you could easily bulge the doors and windows for a few more inches and no need to design from scratch. I know you said cantilever, but that single strut seems well out of the way to me.

It more than meets your performance needs if you want to fly a taildragger, the only down side I see is the need for a 250-300 hp IO-540 or 315 hp IO-580 or something similar. With that much airplane I'd be tempted to go with a big auto conversion.
Dang! I don't think I've ever seen that much leg room in the back seat of a small plane.

#### PMD

##### Well-Known Member
If you re-engine a Cardinal and do it right, you could get your money back selling the STC… just saying
IIRC there IS an STC for IO-390 for the Cardinal now. No, not same as having a 540 in there, but definitely would make more of a hot/high 4 place out of a 177.

#### b7gwap

##### Well-Known Member
IIRC there IS an STC for IO-390 for the Cardinal now. No, not same as having a 540 in there, but definitely would make more of a hot/high 4 place out of a 177.
Plus I don’t think a 390 has a huge weight delta compared to a 360. From
What I understand you want to limit noseheaviness on a 177 anyway, but more power for minimal weight gain is a good swap.