So, we've determined I bought the wrong plane. Thus, I'm looking for a taildragger that's both ready for floats as well as skis. Primarily I'm looking for 180's but then I started seeing 170's that I like. Realistically, if I were to buy a 180, I'd be getting into some mission creep. As much as I want a 180, the 170 would meet my needs 90% of the time.

Please set forth convincing arguments that there's a real reason I "need" the 180. In lieu of that, there are some very nice 170's out there that I think would fit the bill, and when I'm only one person in the plane, would save me $15-$20 an hour just in fuel.

There's an experimental 170 that's for sale that's really caught my eye. The specs are as follows.

Continental TSIO-360-A
Manual Wastegate Controller
R172K wings with 40 degrees of flap(electric).
Scott tailwheel
1954 170B Gear legs
Factory Float Kit
BAS Tail Pull Handles
Shoulder harnesses
Javelin Fuselage Tank (60.3 usable)
172 Style Panel
Shadin Fuel Computer
Gami Injectors
Flap Gap seals and Bushmaster STOL kit
4 Place Intercom
24V with Ground Start Plug
Baggage Door
Door Steward Lights
Audio Checklist
Fresh Bendix Magneto Overhaul
New 172 Interior and Seat Rail AD completed
Tanis Engine Heater
2550lb Gross weight
Full IFR panel

Would I be nuts to consider an experimental 170 such as this?

Please let flow your wealth of opinions!

That doesn't sound like the 170B that I used to fly. Wow, lots of mods. It must be turbocharged if it has a wastegate controller. Electric flaps...yuck. Whats the price of this plane compared to a well equipped 180 that will give you more speed and useful load? It would perform well compared to a stock 170 and still save you 5 gal/hr over the 180. The resale value of the 180 would probably be better though.

Decissions, decissions.

Man I love the 180, the 170 looks better though. But you can always fly the 180 slower to save on fuel (yeah right).
If it's me I'm getting the 180, I had a turbo in a work plane, turbo's are expensive to maintain, plus it caused me a dead stick landing when it separated into two pieces.
I love simplicity...it's the 180.
Then you will never ask ...I wonder if???????

Check the engine?1200 TBO?
So if you don't get the 170 what are they asking, if it experimental you don't have to worry about the TBO
Turbo's are great, but you do have to operate the throttle with a whole different attitude. If you have to do the fixing and paying you learn real quick how to move the throttle slowly and that you have to think about landing way before you get there!!
GT

Pundy

#1 Are the flap gap seals riveted on or put on with screws?
If riveted then I would pass.
See (SEARCH) other posts regarding flap seals in the backcountry.
Especially if you need to do a steep approach to a short no go around strip.

#2 I believe the Javelin tank goes under the back seat - INSIDE the damned plane!
I would pass on that also. Seen too many backcountry planes on their backs.

#3 I am interested in just how the gross weight increase is DOCUMENTED.
Harry Delicker of Delair has tried for years to get a gross weight increase
for 170s and 172s with the FLAT firewall. FAA still says NO.
He was able to get one for the 172s with a "shelf" on the top of the firewall only.

#4 Sounds like you will not have much of a useful weight left over.

#5 A couple of friends have 180s and we actually do fly then around 110mph for mileage.
What the hell, we all need the TIME to log anyway. Also keeps the speed option avail.

#6 Still 170 gear legs with all those mods?
With the 2550 load you just might sit with the prop real close to the ground.
especially with a hard landing.

#7 You did not mention the prop.

Chris C

I'd be surprised if this plane really exists what's the N#. If this plane cruses 125mph and burns 9 gph that equals 13.89 miles per gallon. Before I Pponked my 180 I saw 149mph at 10.5 gph equals 14.19 mph so how's that save you money?

The 180 is more plane than any converted 170. The tail and rudder have more authority on the 180 and the 180 also has an adjustable horizontal not just a trim tab on the 170. For cross country flights speed is nice and MPG will be better in the 180. Dollar for dollar the 180 is a much better choice. Oh I forgot to mention you could just buy a maule

First thing I'd determine is if that "experimental" airplane is really legal as an "Amateur Built Experimental" or if it's in some other category of Experimental. I'd bet it's in one of the other categories, and thus would be virtually useless for "normal" flying.

MTV

My choice would be the 180. More airplane, holds its value better. In the scheme of things, what does the extra cost of gas for a 180 amount to in a year, compared to the benefits? With that said, I am not sure what your thoughts are on skis and floats, but have you checked in to the cost of paying to change from floats to wheels-skis, unless you do it yourself. It is pricey. I still think that unless you are real serious about skis, a 180 would not be a benefit over the nice plane you have now, that is a known commodity. What would it cost to trade for a similarly equipped 180 or to get one up to the speed of what you have now? If you want floats, convert it. I currently have a 185 that does not see wheels any longer, but also had a 182 for years, a great airplane and after you cut through all the bravado about tail wheels, it is better suited to landing on pavement than the Skywagon. If you do look at Skywagons, notice the large % that have been repaired due to ground loops (probably mostly on pavement). What is your mission, what kind of surface will you be operating on, how much do you want to spend? All things to consider.

Ok, a few responses to some of the questions/comments.

The 170 experimental does exist. And, the owner says that it cruises at 135kts which is exactly what my 182 does, but at that speed it's burning 2-3gph less. So, the fuel question is interesting. I completely agree that it will not hold it's value as compared to a 180 or even a 182, but if I buy it right then it should make little difference.

The owner states it's legal as an amateur built exp. He says the only time I have to worry about it is if I am flying into an airshow, in which case I have to notify the Feds 24 hours prior. Does that make sense?

I do truly want the ability to put both floats and skis on my plane, bot just one or the other. It will cost me $15k to put a float kit on my existing plane. There are all sorts of 180's out there that I can buy with good engines, and histories, that have float kits, and I'd spend no more than what I have into my 182. I have checked into the cost of the change. I have 3 guys at my strip (a place that only has 6 planes) that do the change every year. It's less than $1k/year to switch both ways. I know that I will someday groundloop my plane if I get a taildragger. I'm prepared to have that be a consequence in exchange for getting to do the ski flying.

It has a constant speed prop. I'll likely have to change the gear. The flap gaps are removable. He says that all the mods are legal by the Feds and that includes the up-gross.

Thoughts?

180! You can soup up, modify, polish, and primp a 170 and it will never be a 180. With 180 prices being not much different than modified 170's, why bother?

Pundy wrote:Ok, a few responses to some of the questions/comments.

The owner states it's legal as an amateur built exp. He says the only time I have to worry about it is if I am flying into an airshow, in which case I have to notify the Feds 24 hours prior. Does that make sense?

It has a constant speed prop. I'll likely have to change the gear. The flap gaps are removable. He says that all the mods are legal by the Feds and that includes the up-gross.

Thoughts?

The requirement of 24 hours prior notice to fly in to an airshow should light up ALL kinds of alarm bells. That would SUGGEST that the airplane is NOT in the Experimental, Amateur Built category, but rather in one of the other (Airshow and Exhibition) categories of Exp. To be LEGAL, those airplanes cannot be flown just anywhere--like to the back country.

Get the registration number of the plane, and do a search on the FAA database. Specifically look for the certification category.

Finally, if the airplane is legal according to the owner in the Exp/Amateur Built category, how can all the mods and the GW be FAA approved???

That engine is not likely to go to TBO, and as someone pointed out earlier, the TBO is LOOWWWW on those engines. Spell maintenance hog.

I would RUN, not walk, away from that one, unless I got some really heavy assurances from the FAA that this thing is in fact what he purports it to be. And, with that engine, I'd still walk away from it, even if it was what he says it is.

You've got yourself convinced that you NEED a 180. Sell the 182 and buy a 180. All you're doing now is wasting bandwidth

MTV

MTV

mtv wrote:I would RUN, not walk, away from that one

Run is right!!!! That category is pretty much restricted to airshows only. You won't be taking that airplane anywhere. Legally.

A C170 and C180 are complete apples and oranges different airplanes. No matter what you do to it, a C170 still flys like a C120, C140, or C172 with a tailwheel conversion. It's an older airplane than a C180, and it flys like it.

The C180 on the other hand... One of the nicest flying airplanes ever made, and once you figure it out, you'll judge every other airplane you fly against it. Same as a Super Cub. Others may come close, but it's not the same.

Gump

135 kts? what's the Vne on a 170 (140)? Amateur built that means owner built 51% or more? I'll bet not. Every experimental C of A has a little pink piece of paper with the limitations for operation, what are they? I'd also bet the limitations are more than you'd want to be limited to.

W.C. Fields once said "there's a sucker born every day".

You should just buy Bushwagons 180 and move on...simple....Its a good plane, you know where it came from and a good price. Quit pondering on a lemon.

The market has a lot of good 180's out there now with the mods your looking for. Just be thorough on your pre buy. Go with someone who knows and dont trust what the owner tells you. He wants your dough.

Lowrider wishing he had skis....

If I remember correctly Bushwagons 180 does not have a float kit.

I dont think he has the float kit, however for the price you get a good 180, know where it came from and you can add the float kit and your still under $75 or so. Hard to pass up if your seriously looking. Not to mention, if it truns into a lemon you can hassle him here...

A standard 170 is always going to be cheaper to own and operate simply because they normally have a fixed pitch prop and smaller displacement engine, MPG notwithstanding. This thing though sounds like Frankenplane.

170 owners generally prefer them because of their looks. A 180 is a superior aircraft is most all ways, but it doesn't have a round tail.

In my opinion, the appeal of certified aircraft is that you get a machine that has been maintained according to a set of standards set forth by the original manufacturer. Taking a 60 year old certified aircraft into the Experimental category undermines that standard for maintenance/airthworthiness/etc and the resale value drops. I'm not saying Experimental is bad (been reading me lately?) just that the stamp of approval that says the machine is still what it was when it rolled out of the factory is no longer there. Might be better, but resale can suffer. This turbo 170 has been on the market for a while, what does that tell you about its value vs price?

The 180 is golden god on the resale market though. A good one will always move.

Before you even THINK about adding a float kit to a Cessna 180, talk to a maintenance facility that's done it and get a solid quote. It'll make your eyes water, UNLESS you're dealing with one of the very early 180s like 53.

MTV

I think Bushwagons is a 53. I think another member here - Brian from Adventure Seaplanes, has a 180 FS already floated. Look in the for sale items here.