Anyone have any experience with them? Are there any performance gains to the conversion (weight/speed/takeoff&landing) ?
How similar are they to a 170B?

Thanks

When you talk 56 172 vs 56 170 performance is virtually identical. Maybe a different elevator feel but very small amount. Most 172 conversions have an inadequate tail wheel structure. Some have main boxes identical to the 170. Others have a really gehtto custom main gear box with very wide custom main gear.
I don't know much about the omni vision 172 conversions besides they look super limp.

I have taken over the management responsibility (and manufacturing of new parts) for one of the 172 conversion programs. After working on this for nearly three years, i have learned a tremendous amount, and I have gained some hopefully useful knowledge.

The rear tail structure of the early 172 is slightly different than the last 170B's. This makes it difficult, clumsy, and not a really good fit if you try to put the 170 tailwheel structure directly into the 172.

Commonly accepted history holds that Cessna found the tail control response of the big round tail on the 170 could be improved, so they knew they had to design a more efficient (higher aspect) ratio tail for the 180. This worked very well, so when the first opportunity came up, they used it on the new nosewheel version of the 170, which of course is the early 172.

So in THEORY, the converted 172 should have a little better control response than the 170, despite being nearly identical airplanes. We have plenty of high time 170, 172, and 180 pilots around here who can talk about that from thousands of hours of experience. I can't address this question on that level.

There is another entire thread dedicated to the details of my Fravel 172 Tailwheel Conversion, feel free to ask any questions there where I can address them in greater detail.

I did most of my training in a 172, and know them reasonably well.

Edit: its a Bolen conversion.

Any idea if they use the stock gear or if longer gear is used?

I got my training and ppl in a 172m that I just put up for sale on Barnstormers today. It has been a great plane. My only other experience has been a little time in a 180 and SC and now a 182. Mine, with the Bolin conversion, has a 180hp and c/s prop, Horton stol and VG's, 40 degrees of flaps. It's a real performer. It gets off quick and lands short. Though I don't have lots of experience, to me it is a very docile and forgiving plane that handles well. Our home field can get some gusty unpredictable cross winds and it seems to have plenty of control,

Commonly accepted history holds that Cessna found the tail control response of the big round tail on the 170 could be improved, so they knew they had to design a more efficient (higher aspect) ratio tail for the 180. This worked very well, so when the first opportunity came up, they used it on the new nosewheel version of the 170, which of course is the early 172.

Oh but it is so much prettier:)

kaufty wrote:I got my training and ppl in a 172m that I just put up for sale on Barnstormers today....

I checked the BS ad, looks like a nice airplane. Seems like I talked to you once up at Lopez-- I was flying a C150/150 taildragger.