Cruisemaster vs 260B vs Viking

leadsledfan

leadsledfan

New member
Just a question of curiosity as I have been doing more research on the Bellanca family.
When it comes to a cross country IFR platform, what is the advantage of a viking over say a late model triple tail cruisemaster? The cruise speed and load seems about the same unless I am mistaken.
What do you typically see in your cruisemaster as far as cruise speed vs fuel burn?
If you own a cruisemaster, is there anything in a viking you would like to have?
 
a modern engine of the size and type that suits your flying needs is
probably the single biggest difference.
As one gets decades newer, things get progressively more complex, expensive,
modern,and to a degree better supported.

Avionics, oxygen, turbo charging, set the very modern apart from
the antique...and in between are shades of utility, embellishment, cost, and performance.

There is now a significant structural issue with the rear fuselage frame in the Viking,
for which the previously approved fix is now known to be inadequate.

But all planes have their issues.

do your homework and chose the issues you like.

Owners of these birds should have specifics for you... I own an antique,
which fulfills a different mission.
 
I have a 14-19-3. Mine is heavier than others on this board report and I only have about 850lbs useful load. There are trips I'd love to have the 300lbs more in the -3A, but I do like the look of the triple tail. After a recent replacement of all the engine hoses, I'm down to three or four recurring ADs, none of which are hard to comply with. Can't beat that.

I plan for 135 kts true and 12 GPH at 8k. I can hit a bit over 140 true down lower a bit, but mileage goes down. The Vikings definitely go faster, but they burn more gas, too. Not sure how much better / worse their mileage actually is.

One (slight) problem with the older birds is STCs. The AMLs for many of the fun toys (strobe systems, efis, autopilots, etc) include the single tails (including the -3A), but not the triple tails. As far as I know, you're not going to be putting a modern autopilot in a triple tail. Not a problem for me, but some would consider that a deal breaker for an IFR cross country machine. I've thus far been able to work around that problem with everything else, but the FAA isn't going to be doing field approvals for autopilots any time soon.
 
Thanks for the replies!
I have seen cruisemasters and 260B's with decent IFR setups, and simpler auto pilot systems, I agree that the triple tail makes the plane (as far as looks go) it just seems to me that a well equipped later model cruisemaster could be a fantastic IFR machine for moderate IFR and cross country trips for 2-3 people
 
I agree with your assessment; hope I didn't mean to make it sound otherwise. I've flown my -3 from Albuquerque to northern Indiana and Albuquerque to Seattle (round trip and one way) IFR and would happily do long trips in it again.

Really, the -3 fits my needs just about perfectly. It's normally aspirated and doesn't gulp fuel down low, so a quick hop across the sound for breakfast is reasonable. It's fast enough and stable enough that I can make the longer trips. Parts aren't insanely expensive and the factory's pretty good about supporting the Cruisemasters. And, well, it attracts attention on the ramp. My girlfriend would prefer I figure out how to make the seats more comfortable (knew I shouldn't have let her sit in the Cirrus G5 series...), but otherwise it's a great bird.
 
There is a range of, and tolerance for, the antique factor in our planes. I had a Cruisair but I wanted to do some more serious cross country travel. The opportunity came up to move to a Cruisemaster 14-19-2. Now I am enjoying the unique place this plane has on the antique/modern continuum. It is fast enough that I can fly around the Great Lakes and mid-west. It gets lots of attention on the ramp, and we get parked right up front at fly-ins. It has made a reasonably solid IFR aircraft. The O470K is a fairly modern motor that has benefited from updates over the years. The Viking is faster but it loses the cool old airplane look.
When traveling I flight plan at 142kts, 12.5gph. I can give rides around the patch or go for pancakes at 21sq 115kts 8gph without spending too much of fuel.
The only other planes I have let my wife set in have been the Luscombe and the Cruisair so the seats are still good in the Cruisemaster. :wink:
Ralph 9806B
 
123 kts , 10 gph overall. but 100 rpm less and a few knots less and we can easily cruise in the 7-8 gph range
at 6500 -7500 ft. fly two up and starting with full fuel. with the aeromatic set for sea level, climbing above 8500 takes time and costs money. So, in its role as a VFR traveler it does fine, but the bigger brothers are more capable. If I were crossing the higher parts of the sierras or the rockies.. I would certainly reset the prop to normalize around 4000 feet.

Far cry from the performance of the 260 and 300 hp birds.
 
I know I'm a bit late to comment on this thread, but I can't help myself:
I have a 1958 14-19-2 with an O-470K. My son Peter has a 1966 14-19-3A with an IO-470F and a 3 blade McCaulley prop. I love my Cruisemaster, but Peter's has some advantages. For starters, it's faster and climbs better. It also carries more. It has a more effective rudder. The windows are better, the door is better and sitting in the back seat is a treat (leg room, visibility & better vent & heater) It has a Century autopilot that works and Peter says it's great IFR.
The 14-19-3A is an AWESOME plane, and they are downright cheap. If you are an olde tyme hot rodder and are capable of, and love working on a 1950 - 1960's aerial hot rod, you can cost effectively own my cool triple tail, or a 14-19-3A.
No, not as fast as a Cirrus or Mooney, but Cruisemasters are capable of operating from short grass strips, and climb like angels. If you need that (and we do) the mega expensive competition, well, they just can't compete!
We have the bones of a 14-19-3, but no experience flying one, so I'm sorry I can't comment on them. They seem like a transitional model between our 2 fine birds. Must be great too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top