One friendly and generous T-18 builder let me sit in his standard T-18
down at SNF. I'm 6'2" and had thought I wouldn't have enough leg room.
Boy was I surprised! turns out, I had more than enough leg room. The
main thing that was tight was the fact the plane I sat in was the
original fuselage, with the 38" width. The wide body version with the
40" cabin width would be fine. The headroom was tight with the canopy
closed, I had to tilt my head forward, but the builder, who was a bit
short, said he had a 5 inch thick seat cushion on the seat bottom.
With a 2" cushion of temperfoam, I would have had enough room. I sure
do like the look of the T-18, more than the Van's designs. But that's
just a personal preferance. I just can't get past that big rectangular
wing. Reminds me of an old Hershey bar winged Cherokee. Another T-18
builder told me that it's basically a dying design. The folding wing
of both the T-18 and the Mustang II appeal to me. But the t-18 owner
said he knew of no one that actually folded his wings and towed their
airplane home. So maybe that idea isn't as practical in actual
practice as in theory. And with a 180hp engine, the T-18 owner said
he couldn't do a full power runup with the stick all the way back,
without the tail coming off the ground. Seems the 180hp T-18's are a
bit nose heavy, especially with a constant speed prop. I've noticed in
accident reports, nose overs are the most common occurance. One reason
is probably that the gear is swept back, and as the nose rotates down,
the gear moves aft, making the situation worse. Van's have the same
geomety. The Mustang II, with the gear swept forward has the advantage
on that one. But the approach speed of the T-18 and M-II are a lot
higher than a Van's. So short runways are out with those.