Highlander vs Zenith CH-750

For general discussion of the Just Aircraft family of aircraft.
Includes: Highlander, Escapade, Summit and SuperSTOL.
Post Reply
High Altitude
New Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 9:38 pm

Highlander vs Zenith CH-750

Post by High Altitude »

What do you guys think of this comparison? I am interested in building and it is looking like it is going to come down to these two planes.

Of course the big difference is construction method but I am not sure what practical difference that will make. I wonder which method is either to build?

Some other differences......

The Highlander has folding wings and 750 doesn't. I don't think that matters that much for myself.

I like the fact that the 750 has a tricycle setup that is made for rough field landings.
justaircraft
Seasoned Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 5:05 pm

Tricycle for rough field landings

Post by justaircraft »

We just finished developing and testing a new tricycle gear for rough landings for our Highlander, which is our back country model.We are getting a lot of sales already from some Highlander owners that want to convert to tricycle gear from taildraggers.We also are in the process of building a new Highlander with this new gear.
You should  call Troy at the factory for more information.

Harry Berndt

Marketing Manager

Just Aircraft

864-718-0320
Sir Real
Seasoned Member
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 9:06 am
Location: Suffolk, VA

Post by Sir Real »

The 750 with the bubble window is a LOT more comfortable, and the kit may be easier to build. However, the 750's full fuel payload is almost 200 lbs LESS than the Highlander, although it does carry 6 gallons more than the standard Highlander tanks (24 gals for the 750 vs 18 for the Highlander). The 750 has a 401 lb payload with full fuel, vs the highlander's 597 assuming standard tanks.

As usual it comes down to your mission. Highlander is a better load hauler. 750 is cheaper and may (or may not) be a scosh faster. Both do very well in the backcountry. Of course, for the actual max gross weight, it's your kit, so you can write down whatever you want on the paperwork. The above numbers are basically the factory numbers and look to be aimed at LSA weight limits.

Last but not least: Aesthetics. The Highlander is a lot prettier than the 750... :wink:
High Altitude
New Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 9:38 pm

Post by High Altitude »

From what I have read, completed Highlanders are coming out a lot heavier than the specification listed. My opinion is that the real world difference is more around 50 to maybe 75lbs with the 18g of fuel. BUT this could easily change once more 750 kits get up in the air.

75lbs is a huge difference for a LSA. I am sure people purchase the Highlander soley on this alone. It is very tempting and not something I could give up very easily.

Considering take off/landing/climb etc..... the 750 wins but the Highlander all ready has the performance to meet most everyones needs, and then some, so it is hard to say how much of a benefit it really is.

NO doubt the Highlander is a MUCH better looking aircraft.

You can plans build and buy partial kits for the 750. I don't think you can buy plans only for the Highlander, I am not sure about the partial kits.

I guess it comes down to looks, just how much STOL is needed, how much you need the extra payload, if you have your heart set on scratch building and which building method you prefer.

I could own either and be perfectly happy.

Both are great planes and I hope both are around for a long time.

Sir Real wrote:The 750 with the bubble window is a LOT more comfortable, and the kit may be easier to build. However, the 750's full fuel payload is almost 200 lbs LESS than the Highlander, although it does carry 6 gallons more than the standard Highlander tanks (24 gals for the 750 vs 18 for the Highlander). The 750 has a 401 lb payload with full fuel, vs the highlander's 597 assuming standard tanks.

As usual it comes down to your mission. Highlander is a better load hauler. 750 is cheaper and may (or may not) be a scosh faster. Both do very well in the backcountry. Of course, for the actual max gross weight, it's your kit, so you can write down whatever you want on the paperwork. The above numbers are basically the factory numbers and look to be aimed at LSA weight limits.

Last but not least: Aesthetics. The Highlander is a lot prettier than the 750... :wink:
High Altitude
New Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 9:38 pm

Re: Tricycle for rough field landings

Post by High Altitude »

Good news.

I am sure that a lot of people are like myself. They need to be able to land on grass and dirt runways that are some what rough but will never be setting down on a sand bar with 6" rocks on it needing huge bush tires. They prefer the easier handling of the tricycle setup, not to mention cheaper insurance and being able to spend the money for training on something else, but want to make sure the gear can handle it.

Thanks for the info Harry.




justaircraft wrote:We just finished developing and testing a new tricycle gear for rough landings for our Highlander, which is our back country model.We are getting a lot of sales already from some Highlander owners that want to convert to tricycle gear from taildraggers.We also are in the process of building a new Highlander with this new gear.
You should  call Troy at the factory for more information.

Harry Berndt

Marketing Manager

Just Aircraft

864-718-0320
b1x4nqb
Veteran Member
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:53 am
Location: Orwigsburg, PA

Tricycle Highlander gear

Post by b1x4nqb »

2 weeks ago I snuck onto the Highlander testing grounds and caught a snapshot of what is believed to be the new Highlander gear so talked about.  
Image
Paul, PA
Post Reply

Return to “Just Aircraft”