If you operate out of short rough fields most of the time I think I would opt for the Highlander.
This is an urban "back country" legend that gets repeated until everyone thinks it's true. The Highlander image has been, for lack of a better word, manipulated to make folks think it is more rugged than the Kitfox. Every photograph is of one with huge tires and an aggressive stance. Makes you think it is better for rough fields and short strips. Not so fast. Kitfox owned that territory for decades before the Highlander was ever conceived. The Kitfox still retains all those capabilities from days past yet has evolved into a very refined and comfortable aircraft with zero compromises. The Highlander image has been presented as the answer to the folks dreaming of being "bush pilots". Why fall for the marketing angle.
Don't let the Youtube videos showing dead stick take offs from mountain tops or tail up turns on top of rocky mountains fool you. You know the video's I'm speaking of.
The Kitfox can do anything you've seen the Highlanders do with no apologies for the faster cruise speeds, better looks, sportier handling and superior factory support. Time for one "urban legend" to retire. Might be time for Myth Busters to do a fly off.
The people that build the Highlander are good folks. They build a good safe machine that performs well but it will never be a Kitfox.

Beauty and brawn.
P1060178.jpg