Photo: Richard Eldridge, U.S. Air Force, public domain
Light, harmonized, and crisp — push-rod controls with natural self-centering ailerons and a chirp-first, crisp-break stall.
Sources: CubCrafters published specifications; CubCrafters XCub POH.
The XCub is CubCrafters' answer to a simple question: what would the Super Cub be if you designed it today with certified modern materials and no compromise on backcountry manners? It lifts off in a couple hundred feet, cruises faster than any classic Cub, and lands on gravel bars that are not airports.
For a simmer the XCub is the low-and-slow specialist. The interesting flying happens between 30 and 70 knots, and the profile is tuned so that regime is where the feel lives: light, immediate controls through push rods, not the slack of the old cable Cubs.
CubCrafters started as a Super Cub rebuild shop in Yakima, Washington in 1980, and spent decades learning what breaks and what matters in working Cubs. The XCub, certified in 2016, is that experience built into a new airframe: carbon and modern alloys under classic rag-and-tube looks.
It is one of very few clean-sheet Part 23 certifications of its era done without outside capital, and it quickly became the benchmark modern backcountry taildragger. The CC19-180 modeled here is the original 180 hp certified version.
Each finding pairs our reading with the evidence it rests on. Fly the type and read something wrong? Every claim links straight to the corrections form.
The XCub exists to fix the Super Cub's known control flaws — heavy ailerons and the slop that pulley-actuated cables can't avoid. Push-rod linkages give a tight, precise feel with no cable stretch.
Reviewers converge on the same word: balanced. Lazy 8s reveal a finely balanced pitch and roll feel; the ailerons are crisp, quick, and light, with equally pleasing pitch response — "the most balanced Cub ever".
The hinge and cove redesign gives lower lateral control loads and a natural centering tendency, with only a tiny deadband right on center before effectiveness comes in smoothly and progressively.
The float-equipped NXCub is described as slightly heavier in pitch than roll, with relatively long stick throws in pitch and strong trim stability — near-balanced harmony, pitch a touch heavier.
A chirping aural stall warning arrives around 50 mph, followed by a crisp break with a slight left-wing drop. Handled gently, the NXCub could not be made to break at all. No reviewer describes heavy pre-stall stick buffet.
| Gate | Knots | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| VsoStall, landing configuration | 34 | Marketing stall figures (~40 clean / 34 flaps); no TCDS stall speed publishedRepresentative |
| VrRotation | 45 | Fly-off just above stall — backcountry techniqueRepresentative |
| VyBest rate of climb | 64 | AOPA Pilot, Hirschman — "Introducing the XCub" and NXCub reports |
| VappApproach | 50 | Representative |
| VfeMaximum flaps extended | 73 | 46° full flap · EASA TCDS — CubCrafters CC19-180 XCub |
| VaManeuvering | 86 | At 2,300 lb; 79 KCAS at utility weight · EASA TCDS — CubCrafters CC19-180 XCub |
| VnoMaximum structural cruise | 117 | EASA TCDS — CubCrafters CC19-180 XCub |
| VneNever exceed | 142 | TCDS; the marketing 145 kt redline conflicts and is not used · EASA TCDS — CubCrafters CC19-180 XCub |
The complete starter profile, in the same order and with the same names as the desktop Tuning page. Highlighted rows cite evidence. Hover a row to see its profile-JSON path.
The final overall output scale applied to everything the model produces, before the device cap.
▲ More: everything (spring, loads, effects) gets stronger together. ▼ Less: everything softens together.
Why here: Class default: 85% leaves headroom to raise overall strength without re-balancing the mix.
The base centring force that pulls the stick back to centre. Every other force stacks on it. Too low and the stick feels limp in normal flight; too high and it fights your hand and masks the smaller cues layered above it.
▲ More: firmer centring that resists your hand at all times. ▼ Less: a limper stick that leans on aerodynamic load alone.
Why here: Lighter than the 172's yoke: a stick on push rods centres cleanly but with less breakout mass. 75% keeps it definite without heaviness.
A small neutral zone around centre where the spring stays quiet, so tiny movements at rest don't chatter. Wider is calmer but looser; narrower is more precise but can twitch around centre.
▲ More: a calmer but looser centre with more free play. ▼ Less: a tighter centre that may chatter at rest.
The old wider deadband encoded cable freeplay this airframe specifically does not have — push rods, a tiny center deadband, natural centering.
How much of the spring survives at a standstill, before airspeed can build any aerodynamic force. A high floor keeps the parked stick firm; a low floor gives the loose, cable-slack feel of a parked light aircraft.
▲ More: a firmer stick while parked and taxiing. ▼ Less: a floppier parked stick that only wakes up with airspeed.
Why here: A parked XCub stick is firmer than a cable Cub's but still relaxed. The controls wake up quickly on the roll, which at this aircraft's speeds means almost immediately.
The sustained pitch load from elevator deflection and airspeed, balanced independently of roll. This is the main lever behind a type's pitch weight. It does not touch aileron, spring, trim, or buffet forces.
▲ More: heavier sustained pitch forces at speed. ▼ Less: a lighter elevator that takes less muscle to hold.
Why here: Pitch is the reference axis at 100%.
The sustained roll load from aileron deflection and airspeed, balanced independently of pitch. Together with the elevator load it sets the control-harmony ratio reviewers talk about.
▲ More: heavier roll forces. ▼ Less: lighter, quicker-feeling ailerons.
Near-balanced harmony with pitch a touch heavier — well above the C172's 0.65 split.
A master scale over both sustained axis loads, applied before their independent balance. Profiles normally leave this alone and tune the two axis loads instead.
▲ More: both axes load up harder. ▼ Less: both axes lighten together.
Why here: 85% places the light-but-alive load band where a 2,300 lb taildragger belongs.
The indicated airspeed where aerodynamic load reaches its designed full level. It anchors the whole load curve to the aircraft's real speed range: a 172 loads up by 110 knots, a jet much later.
▲ More: loads arrive later; the stick stays light up to a higher speed. ▼ Less: loads arrive earlier and cruise feels heavier.
Why here: 110 kt is the XCub's realistic working cruise. Loads top out where the aircraft actually flies, not at its rarely-used maximum.
How sharply stick load builds with airspeed. 1.0 is linear; about 2.0 matches real aerodynamics, where dynamic pressure grows with the square of speed, so controls are much lighter slow and firm up fast. Felt when holding the stick off centre, not at rest.
▲ More: lighter at low speed with a steeper rise toward cruise. ▼ Less: a more linear build that loads up earlier.
Direct-linkage reversible controls feel the raw hinge moment, so the load builds with dynamic pressure; the cruise-reference magnitude is unchanged.
How much the centring itself stiffens with speed, on top of the deflection loads. Zero keeps centre feel constant; more makes the stick centre harder at cruise and looser in the pattern.
▲ More: a centre that hardens noticeably as you go faster. ▼ Less: constant centre feel at every speed.
The stick keeps firming above the 45 kt fly-off band toward Vno instead of going flat.
A cap on each steady pitch or roll force before it reaches the device, guarding against slamming or saturating the hardware in strong maneuvers.
▲ More: stronger peak steady forces before clipping. ▼ Less: a gentler ceiling; hard maneuvers flatten out sooner.
Why here: 50%: the lightest cap in the fleet after the glider. Nothing about an XCub should slam.
For hydraulically-boosted or fly-by-wire types: how much of the raw aerodynamic load actually reaches the pilot's hand. 1.0 is a fully manual control run; lower values model the artificial-feel systems that isolate the pilot from true surface loads.
▲ More: more raw aerodynamic load reaching your hand. ▼ Less: more isolation, closer to pure artificial feel.
Why here: Inert for a manual control run.
How strongly elevator trim relieves held pitch force and shifts where the stick settles. At 100%, a properly trimmed aircraft needs no held pressure, the trim-away-the-load workflow of real flying.
▲ More: trim removes more of the held pitch force; at 100% full trim zeroes it. ▼ Less: you keep holding force even when trimmed.
Why here: Standard 30% relief: trim eases the load but you still fly the pressure changes, as in the real aircraft.
Extra spring stiffness as positive G rises above 1G: the pull-up loads your arm as well as the wing. Too little and steep turns feel weightless; too much and maneuvering becomes tiring.
▲ More: pull-ups and steep turns stiffen the stick more per g. ▼ Less: g has less effect; maneuvering stays light.
Light forces on a +3.8 g normal envelope; clearly below the C172's firm trainer curve.
Extra centre deadband added at parked and taxi speeds, narrowing away as airflow builds. It keeps the stick calm on the ramp without costing precision in flight.
▲ More: a calmer, looser stick on the ground. ▼ Less: ground handling as precise as flight, and as twitchy.
Reduced for the same reason: the slop being simulated was Super Cub character, not XCub character.
How far through the travel the edge-of-throw spring boost begins. High values leave most of the range linear and put a firm wall only near full deflection.
▲ More: the end-of-travel wall starts later, leaving more linear throw. ▼ Less: the wall begins earlier in the travel.
Why here: The wall starts at 85% travel. Slips and full-rudder work are normal XCub flying, so most of the throw stays linear.
How strong that edge-of-travel boost is once triggered: a soft warning versus a hard stop near full throw.
▲ More: a harder stop near full deflection. ▼ Less: a softer edge you can push through.
Why here: A gentle edge, matching a rod-limited control run.
Rolling surface vibration from wheel speed and surface type: pavement, grass, or gravel under the gear.
▲ More: louder surface texture through the stick. ▼ Less: a smoother taxi.
Why here: 50%: the highest rumble in the fleet. Tundra tires on gravel are most of the XCub's life, and surface texture is real information here.
Short discrete bumps from expansion joints, ruts, and rough surface, punctuating the continuous rumble.
▲ More: sharper hits from joints and ruts. ▼ Less: softer ground detail.
Why here: 30%: rocks and ruts should register. The long-travel gear soaks the big hits but you feel the surface.
Vibration under brake pressure while rolling. Invisible braking feels wrong; too much makes every stop feel like an anti-skid event.
▲ More: more shudder under braking. ▼ Less: quieter stops.
Why here: Modest toe-brake shudder. Heavy braking on a taildragger is how you end up on your nose, and the cue reflects light use.
The fore-aft pull on the pitch axis from acceleration on the ground. The takeoff surge draws the column aft; braking pushes it forward.
▲ More: a stronger fore-aft pull under acceleration and braking. ▼ Less: a subtler surge cue.
Why here: A light surge cue for a 180 hp aircraft that leaves the ground before the surge builds.
Airframe shake approaching the stall and while the stall warning is active: how loudly this wing announces it is unhappy. Types with a crisp break get modest buffet and let the horn carry the warning.
▲ More: a louder pre-stall shake. ▼ Less: a quieter wing; the horn carries the warning.
The warning is the aural chirp; the buffet cue stays modest ahead of the crisp break.
Airframe shake past the overspeed warning, the airframe's own protest at exceeding Vne/VMO.
▲ More: a harsher protest past the redline. ▼ Less: a gentler overspeed warning.
Why here: Standard protest past the redline. With Vne at 152 KIAS you have to try.
Low-frequency airframe vibration with flaps extended into the airflow, in the speed window where they actually work the air.
▲ More: a rougher ride with flaps working the air. ▼ Less: smoother approach flap.
Why here: 35%: big slotted flaps working hard at approach speed make real airframe noise.
Random shake from short-term G variation in rough air, so bumpy air is felt and not just seen.
▲ More: rough air hits the stick harder. ▼ Less: calmer chop.
Why here: 50%: very light wing loading. The XCub rides every bump of a backcountry afternoon, and hiding that would misrepresent the type.
Continuous powerplant vibration following RPM between idle and full power, the ever-present reminder that something is burning fuel up front.
▲ More: more engine through the stick. ▼ Less: a quieter powerplant.
Why here: The O-360 four-banger is present through the airframe at 22%, a touch above the 172.
The one-shot kick when the wheels meet the runway, scaled by sink rate: a greaser whispers, a firm arrival thumps.
▲ More: a harder kick at touchdown. ▼ Less: softer arrivals.
Why here: 60%: arrivals matter but the long-stroke gear genuinely absorbs. A perfect three-pointer should feel soft.
Continuous vibration only while the sim reports the flap surfaces actually travelling. It follows real actuator motion and failures, not an estimated timer.
▲ More: more vibration while the flap surfaces travel. ▼ Less: quieter flap runs.
Why here: Manual-style flap runs are felt lightly while the surfaces travel.
The small airframe settle when flap-surface travel completes, driven by the surface arriving, not the handle command.
▲ More: a firmer settle as flaps reach the notch. ▼ Less: a softer arrival.
Why here: A small settle at each notch.
The short mechanical click on each flap-handle detent. The handle, not the surfaces.
▲ More: a sharper detent click. ▼ Less: a fainter click.
Why here: 40%: the flap handle detents are distinctly mechanical in the real cockpit.
The sustained pitch-force change from flap drag at airspeed. Extending flaps should change what your hand holds, not just make noise.
▲ More: a bigger stick-load change when the flaps come out. ▼ Less: less trim shift from flap.
Why here: Flap changes rebalance pitch modestly at XCub speeds.
Power-on pitch bias from propwash over the elevator: why adding power on a prop aircraft nudges the nose and the stick. Zero for jets.
▲ More: a stronger power-on pitch nudge. ▼ Less: power changes feel more neutral.
Why here: 22%: a big prop close to a light tail. Power changes talk to the stick immediately, part of the type's charm.
Resistance proportional to the aircraft's pitch rotation rate. It settles the stick after abrupt pitch inputs; zero on both axes turns rate damping off.
▲ More: the stick settles harder against pitch rotation. ▼ Less: less resistance to quick pitch changes.
Why here: Small settle after abrupt inputs; the aircraft's own damping is good.
The roll-axis counterpart: damping against roll rate to stop post-input wobble.
▲ More: more resistance to roll rate. ▼ Less: a livelier roll axis.
Why here: Lighter still: roll should stay lively.
How hard the elevator falls forward at rest, the parked slump of an unpowered control run. Zero disables it.
▲ More: a heavier forward slump at rest. ▼ Less: a lighter parked lean.
Why here: A parked XCub elevator rests on its stop like any taildragger; 25% reproduces the slump.
Whether this feature is active in this profile.
Taildragger deck angle — the parked-yoke forward-drop model doesn't apply.
The airspeed where the forward slump has fully faded, typically almost as soon as airflow builds on the takeoff roll.
▲ More: the slump lingers further into the takeoff roll. ▼ Less: it vanishes almost as soon as you roll.
Why here: Gone by 30 kt, which for an XCub is halfway to rotation.
How far autopilot commands may physically move the stick. Kept tiny in MSFS, where a moved axis can read back as pilot input; zero disables following entirely.
▲ More: the autopilot visibly moves your stick further. ▼ Less: a barely perceptible follow.
Why here: Tiny follow for the optional autopilot; MSFS can read a moved axis back as pilot input.
How firmly the stick holds the autopilot's commanded position while following is active.
▲ More: a firmer hold on the AP's commanded position. ▼ Less: softer, easy to override.
Why here: Just enough hold to feel the servo flying.
Research retune: q-law load shaping, tightened center deadband (push rods, not cables), near-balanced aileron harmony, lighter G curve, stick drop off for the taildragger.
Initial starter baseline.
If your time in the type says this page got something wrong, correct it here.
This page is built from cited references, and real time in the type beats a citation. Tell us what the actual aircraft does. Corrections go to the maintainer for review and feed the next revision of this research.
What the research could not pin down. If you fly the type, or can point at a source, a correction on any of these feeds the next revision directly.
Absolute spring and gain magnitudes are device-relative and bench-set — no published figure maps stick forces to a consumer device.
Breakout force — only the qualitative "tiny deadband" description exists.
Roll-rate-derived damping numbers — the ~45°/s figure is cited for the float variant only.
Open conversation about flying and tuning the CubCrafters XCub, in the community forum. Corrections above go privately to the maintainer; hangar talk is public.