If you actually travel the CS would be really nice, for just training a waste of money IMHO.

I run the O320 FP hard so when I start fighting thermals the RPM tends to wonder a lot, a CS prop stays right where I set it.

It so damned slow, I don’t think it would ever be much for traveling. Your lucky to get 100kts out of it. I’m not even certain it would outrun my 150. The upgrade would help, but I figure 5 knots or so at best—-200-275nm trips are probably best case scenario.

While I've only had a single flight in a '68 Cardinal with fixed-pitch prop, I'm about 99% sure that the owner demonstrated cruise speeds that were closer to 115 knots at reasonable power setting. Not a speed-burner, by any means, but certainly not a " lucky to get 100 kts airplane. Seemed like a reasonable tradeoff to give up a bit of cruise speed for the much roomier cockpit and easier entry/exit.

I didn't purchase the Cardinal, but it wasn't because of the lack of cruise speed... The seller was just wanted more money than I felt the airplane was worth at the time, given the condition and the time on the engine/prop. There were very few fixed-gear Cardinals on the market at that time, so the pickings were slim. I went a different route, but still sometimes wonder if I would have been happier with the Cardinal. I wound up with an airplane that was fast, but a bit "tight" and uncomfortable me on longer flights, so I didn't keep it very long. Maybe the Cardinal would have been a better option at the time!

As for "too slow for traveling"... I made a 945-mile trip in my 100-mph airplane, and guys with Cubs do long trips averaging 65-70 mph as well. Admittedly, it is more about the journey than the destination, and you gotta enjoy flying (versus "traveling") for it to be fun. (I sometimes wonder if the "fast and furious" crowd doesn't miss out on a lot of the fun of flying! Likely a minority opinion here on BeechTalk, but...)

While I've only had a single flight in a '68 Cardinal with fixed-pitch prop, I'm about 99% sure that the owner demonstrated cruise speeds that were closer to 115 knots at reasonable power setting. Not a speed-burner, by any means, but certainly not a " lucky to get 100 kts airplane. Seemed like a reasonable tradeoff to give up a bit of cruise speed for the much roomier cockpit and easier entry/exit.

I didn't purchase the Cardinal, but it wasn't because of the lack of cruise speed... The seller was just wanted more money than I felt the airplane was worth at the time, given the condition and the time on the engine/prop. There were very few fixed-gear Cardinals on the market at that time, so the pickings were slim. I went a different route, but still sometimes wonder if I would have been happier with the Cardinal. I wound up with an airplane that was fast, but a bit "tight" and uncomfortable me on longer flights, so I didn't keep it very long. Maybe the Cardinal would have been a better option at the time!

As for "too slow for traveling"... I made a 945-mile trip in my 100-mph airplane, and guys with Cubs do long trips averaging 65-70 mph as well. Admittedly, it is more about the journey than the destination, and you gotta enjoy flying (versus "traveling") for it to be fun. (I sometimes wonder if the "fast and furious" crowd doesn't miss out on a lot of the fun of flying! Likely a minority opinion here on BeechTalk, but...)

While I've only had a single flight in a '68 Cardinal with fixed-pitch prop, I'm about 99% sure that the owner demonstrated cruise speeds that were closer to 115 knots at reasonable power setting. Not a speed-burner, by any means, but certainly not a " lucky to get 100 kts airplane. Seemed like a reasonable tradeoff to give up a bit of cruise speed for the much roomier cockpit and easier entry/exit.

I didn't purchase the Cardinal, but it wasn't because of the lack of cruise speed... The seller was just wanted more money than I felt the airplane was worth at the time, given the condition and the time on the engine/prop. There were very few fixed-gear Cardinals on the market at that time, so the pickings were slim. I went a different route, but still sometimes wonder if I would have been happier with the Cardinal. I wound up with an airplane that was fast, but a bit "tight" and uncomfortable me on longer flights, so I didn't keep it very long. Maybe the Cardinal would have been a better option at the time!

As for "too slow for traveling"... I made a 945-mile trip in my 100-mph airplane, and guys with Cubs do long trips averaging 65-70 mph as well. Admittedly, it is more about the journey than the destination, and you gotta enjoy flying (versus "traveling") for it to be fun. (I sometimes wonder if the "fast and furious" crowd doesn't miss out on a lot of the fun of flying! Likely a minority opinion here on BeechTalk, but...)

When I was looking at the Cardinal, it was going to be my "first" airplane. I wound up getting a super deal on a really nice '75 Grumman Traveler. That's the one that was a bit "tight" for this admittedly "larger than average" guy, especially if I had a passenger along... It was an absolutely gorgeous airplane, and would cruise at 130 KTAS at altitude with the O-320 (high-compression STC) burning 7.5-8 gph. And it was a really fun plane to fly - light and responsive on the controls like a little fighter plane. Yet still a decent instrument platform, and handled turbulence fairly well. It was just really tight with my wife (or anyone else) in the cockpit with me.

The 945-mile trip? That was when I bought my current plane, a RANS S-6ES Coyote II. It's an E-LSA (2 seats, 100 HP Rotax). On that flight home, I was battling 35-45 knot winds (mostly headwind component) so my ground speed really sucked. But the scenery was amazing!

I put big tires on the S-6ES so I can land on semi-prepared fields, and that probably slowed it a little. The bigger impact on my cruise speed is that the ground-adjustable prop is set way too "fine" at the moment. I have to throttle back significantly in cruise to avoid exceeding redline rpm in level flight, so I'm giving up a fair bit of speed. Currently cruises at 100-105 mph (5.2 gph), but should be able to do 110-120 mph at that same fuel burn when I get the prop pitch set correctly... And oddly enough, I'll probably gain some climb performance as well, according to the Rotax "gurus", since I'm currently not climbing at optimal RPM either. I currently max out around 1000 fpm, whereas most folks are getting closer to 1200 fpm with the proper pitch settings. Fun plane - STOL enough for me, and cheap enough to be affordable for the retired guy.

PS - to someone else's point – and to bring this back to the original thread topic – I don't believe there is any airplane that is easier to get in and out of than the Cardinal. That big door and the low seats make it super-easy!

They are JUNK. Thats all I am going to say.

One tried to kill me in Key West a few years ago and I haven't got much good to say about them since.

When I was looking at the Cardinal, it was going to be my "first" airplane. I wound up getting a super deal on a really nice '75 Grumman Traveler. That's the one that was a bit "tight" for this admittedly "larger than average" guy, especially if I had a passenger along... It was an absolutely gorgeous airplane, and would cruise at 130 KTAS at altitude with the O-320 (high-compression STC) burning 7.5-8 gph. And it was a really fun plane to fly - light and responsive on the controls like a little fighter plane. Yet still a decent instrument platform, and handled turbulence fairly well. It was just really tight with my wife (or anyone else) in the cockpit with me.

The 945-mile trip? That was when I bought my current plane, a RANS S-6ES Coyote II. It's an E-LSA (2 seats, 100 HP Rotax). On that flight home, I was battling 35-45 knot winds (mostly headwind component) so my ground speed really sucked. But the scenery was amazing!

I put big tires on the S-6ES so I can land on semi-prepared fields, and that probably slowed it a little. The bigger impact on my cruise speed is that the ground-adjustable prop is set way too "fine" at the moment. I have to throttle back significantly in cruise to avoid exceeding redline rpm in level flight, so I'm giving up a fair bit of speed. Currently cruises at 100-105 mph (5.2 gph), but should be able to do 110-120 mph at that same fuel burn when I get the prop pitch set correctly... And oddly enough, I'll probably gain some climb performance as well, according to the Rotax "gurus", since I'm currently not climbing at optimal RPM either. I currently max out around 1000 fpm, whereas most folks are getting closer to 1200 fpm with the proper pitch settings. Fun plane - STOL enough for me, and cheap enough to be affordable for the retired guy.

PS - to someone else's point – and to bring this back to the original thread topic – I don't believe there is any airplane that is easier to get in and out of than the Cardinal. That big door and the low seats make it super-easy!

Near death via a Cardinal?

This one seems gentle as a lamb to me.

KSPG

KSPG

I flew a brand new 1968 Cardinal, for about a year, unmodified at the time. Since it was a company airplane and I was always alone, I didn't think it was that much different than the 172. I always had weight in the baggage compartment, so I unwittingly was helping myself out.

BUT!!!!!! The point I'd like to stress here is this:

This wing is not a short field wing: DO NOT EVER TRY AND "YANK IT OFF THE GROUND".
A laminar flow wing will not climb until the proper speed is attained. You will be in ground effect until you do attain that speed, or hit something first! Trust me (1,000+ hrs Comanche time, laminar flow wing).

I had a friend that had the 180hp CS prop model and he liked it, flew it all over the country(went to a Baron after that).

Regarding the discussion about CS vs. fixed prop, I have flown 180 Cherokee and 180 Comanche, acceleration on take off, big difference!

The 150 would be ok as a trainer I would think, just a bit of a dog. Not good for small airports. If you are going to keep it, get a CS 180.

Oh,-----Watch your forehead when approaching the wing, especially from the rear!

Ps Friend just bought 180 fixed prop, likes the entry for "older" guests.

OK - no not fixed gear; BUT, if I was younger (not) and licensed (not) this would be my airplane.

TAT 177RG

https://taturbo.com/frames.html

Yes and Yes. There's a 68 on Barnstormers with the 180 HP conversion now for $55K. The 150 HP plane is a dog.