18 May 2024, 18:24 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 07 Apr 2024, 02:22 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/04/13 Posts: 4686 Post Likes: +3402 Location: Hampton, VA
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Aerodynamically, they have the same wing. I think the main noticeable difference is the power loading. Even though the 180 is heavier, it has proportionally more power. That results in faster climbs and higher cruise speeds.
Fuselage is the same width, but the 180 is a little taller and I think has more bagge capacity. Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t the later model 180s go to the high lift chamber leading edge, somewhat changing the old 2412 airfoil?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 07 Apr 2024, 02:29 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/23/13 Posts: 8149 Post Likes: +5883 Company: Kokotele Guitar Works Location: Albany, NY
Aircraft: C-182RG, C-172, PA28
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Aerodynamically, they have the same wing. I think the main noticeable difference is the power loading. Even though the 180 is heavier, it has proportionally more power. That results in faster climbs and higher cruise speeds.
Fuselage is the same width, but the 180 is a little taller and I think has more bagge capacity. Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t the later model 180s go to the high lift chamber leading edge, somewhat changing the old 2412 airfoil?
AFAIK, the whole fleet got the same leading edge cuff.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 07 Apr 2024, 08:45 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/01/14 Posts: 2160 Post Likes: +1676 Location: 0TX0 Granbury TX
Aircraft: T-210M Aeronca 7AC
|
|
I saw a 170 with a TSIO 360 at Trigger Gap AR. It had a bunch of backcountry mods and he boasted better fuel economy and performance than his 180/185 brethren. He was, at that time, the local representative for the RAF in Arkansas. There’s a lot of promotion going on for flying Arkansas (Walton supported). Look into Fly Oz.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 07 Apr 2024, 11:40 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/23/15 Posts: 30 Post Likes: +37 Location: West Bend, Wisconsin
Aircraft: Cessna 170A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Downsides: it doesn't have enough useful load, doesn't hold enough fuel, and has a smallish weird panel that's not great of IFR. So if those are high on your mission set look at the 180.
I love my 170A. Leaps off the runway, flies like a dream. I haven't found useful load to be a problem, but it is a pain getting to the baggage area, over the folded down rear seat. Range is an issue, especially with the restriction on taking off with 1/4 tank or less. I plan for 2.5 hours between stops so there's at least 1/4 tank available for go-arounds. Unless I'm absolutely certain that I'll nail the landing. (Yeah, right.). The lack of decent instrument trainers around here led me to put in a vintage-looking glass IFR panel (three Garmin 275s and a 355) so I could earn my instrument rating. But the lack of range is still an issue if an alternate is ever needed. But for training, it's great. I did look at getting something bigger, higher, faster. But came back to the fact that you can't beat the sexiness of a 170.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 07 Apr 2024, 15:26 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/23/13 Posts: 8149 Post Likes: +5883 Company: Kokotele Guitar Works Location: Albany, NY
Aircraft: C-182RG, C-172, PA28
|
|
Username Protected wrote: …and he boasted better fuel economy and performance than his 180/185 brethren. That’s always going to be the case. The 18x series burns more gas than it gets in speed increases over the 17x series. It’s like a 35% increase in fuel burn for a 20% increase in speed.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 07 Apr 2024, 15:50 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/04/13 Posts: 4686 Post Likes: +3402 Location: Hampton, VA
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I saw a 170 with a TSIO 360 at Trigger Gap AR. It had a bunch of backcountry mods and he boasted better fuel economy and performance than his 180/185 brethren. He was, at that time, the local representative for the RAF in Arkansas. There’s a lot of promotion going on for flying Arkansas (Walton supported). Look into Fly Oz. Depends on his metric for “performance” getting burger and having fun on the grass while not burning much fuel, sure Taking off in a still short distance, having a acceptable cruise speed, hauling a load, IFR/VFR and having some legs, the 170 does not have performance A skywagon… on floats.. will easily cruise 120kts I’d say a 170 is a great plane if you’re just flying you and one other and some stuff recreationally VMC within about 100nm or less, ie its a great $100 burger getter, or going camping for a night with the wife at a nearby grass strip (if you don’t need to haul a lot) For me and that mission I’d be looking at building up a nice PA18, the 170 is nice but for me it’s a middle ground I just don’t really get between a supercub and a skywagon
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 07 Apr 2024, 16:52 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/25/17 Posts: 237 Post Likes: +94 Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Aircraft: P210 SE, C182
|
|
I think someone referred to part of this earlier, but the 180's (not sure if all or just some) have a stabilator (A stabilizer and elevator built into one). The stabilator makes a significant difference in getting off the ground quicker as the entire section moves, particularly on floats with a heavy load. I believe the stabilator earned the nickname the "flying tail". This video shows it for those not familiar although this isn't of a 180. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XUzzKFEcLYGarth
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 07 Apr 2024, 17:09 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/04/13 Posts: 4686 Post Likes: +3402 Location: Hampton, VA
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I think someone referred to part of this earlier, but the 180's (not sure if all or just some) have a stabilator (A stabilizer and elevator built into one). The stabilator makes a significant difference in getting off the ground quicker as the entire section moves, particularly on floats with a heavy load. I believe the stabilator earned the nickname the "flying tail". This video shows it for those not familiar although this isn't of a 180. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XUzzKFEcLYGarth I don’t think so I’ve never seen a skywagon with a stabilator They do have a trimable stabilizer vs a trim tab though
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 08 Apr 2024, 16:19 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/19/08 Posts: 1497 Post Likes: +1794 Location: Far West Texas
Aircraft: B58, C180, GL 2T1A-2
|
|
There is nothing that can compare to the early 180. It is not good at any particular thing... it is great at everything. I obtained mine from a corrupt airport commandante. Part of the negotiation was a bet on a cock fight, (that is, the avian kind). The comm later changed his mind, and impounded it at the Juarez airport on a technicality, chaining the prop. My bolt cutter at 2:00 AM set her free, and I brought her to the US some 50' above the earth. The comandante later passed under unexpected circumstances, and the man that replaced him was much friendlier, as he owed me some favors. I operated the 180 in support of my cattle ranches in the Mexican Sierra Madre for some 40 years. 50,00 acres can best be managed with a Skywagon. My deluxe landing strip was 900 feet long, uphill, blind canyon; always with a quartering tailwind that scared the p.ss out of my girlfriends. (PPonk made a world of difference, thank you Steve and Norma). It got me out of a couple of tight situations down there, to include a gunfight with some bad hombres. Sadly, my best horse perished in extracting me from the fracas. When I got sick enough of the drug lords, I sold the beautifully productive land, crafted by my grandfather, and got out, mostly in one piece. That ended a more than 200 year epic saga of land, cattle, and dealing with a dysfunctional judicial system that makes anything we have going here look like paradise. Kept my 180, changed its registry from "XB" to "N", taught it to speak English, and it's been a model citizen since then. It's had me from Alaska, to Costa Rica, Belize, Yucatan, Cuba, Florida, the Great Lakes, and much of Canada. My father, who also flew it when he was alive, left me a heartfelt message inside the oil inspection door, before his passing. It is still there. A Cessna 180 is not a thing. It is, like your best horse or dog, a friend and companion. Losing anyone of them hurts deeply. To say that I have an emotional investment in this wonderful airplane is an understatement. It will soon come under a full restoration by Mountain Airframe. Best, TN
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 08 Apr 2024, 16:47 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/11/10 Posts: 12431 Post Likes: +11477 Location: Indiana
Aircraft: Cessna 185, RV-7
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I think someone referred to part of this earlier, but the 180's (not sure if all or just some) have a stabilator (A stabilizer and elevator built into one). The stabilator makes a significant difference in getting off the ground quicker as the entire section moves, particularly on floats with a heavy load. I believe the stabilator earned the nickname the "flying tail". This video shows it for those not familiar although this isn't of a 180. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XUzzKFEcLYGarth No flying tail, but elevator trim is by a jackscrew that moves the forward portion of the stabilizer. It's like a J-3 or an early 182. On the question of 180 vs upgraded 170, there are a couple of issues people skip over in these conversations: 1) 180 hp 170's are rare. Right now, there are two on Barnstormers, compared to seven 180's. 2) "Super" 170 prices are in the same ballpark as 180's. One of the two on Barnstormers right now is listed by an old guy who promotes it endlessly on Backcountrypilot who, despite not mentioning it in the ad, must be including a couple of gold ingots in the price. I'm sure the 170s are nice, but if you get to the point where you've "gotta have one of those," you may spend a long time not flying.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 08 Apr 2024, 17:20 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/28/13 Posts: 6071 Post Likes: +4050 Location: Indiana
Aircraft: C195, D17S, M20TN
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Any thoughts on a 180 with the P-Ponk engine? More horsepower is always good, no? Tom a friend’s C180 has an Air Plains, Wellington KS. IO 550 with all the Snider speed kits available on it. One of the fastest 5 180’s in the US he always said. It was a beauty. Of course Ken Snider made those kits with his son…..
_________________ Chuck KEVV
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: cessna 180 vs super 170 Posted: 08 Apr 2024, 18:25 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/04/13 Posts: 4686 Post Likes: +3402 Location: Hampton, VA
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Any thoughts on a 180 with the P-Ponk engine? More horsepower is always good, no? Tom a friend’s C180 has an Air Plains, Wellington KS. IO 550 with all the Snider speed kits available on it. One of the fastest 5 180’s in the US he always said. It was a beauty. Of course Ken Snider made those kits with his son…..
I’d wager the speed mods lower the value of the plane
Most folks will go through lots of effort to even remove flap gap seals on skywagons
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|