Is an STC required to install 8.50's on the mains of a Cessna 182B and is it legal for the owner, not an A&P, to do the work. Thanks for all the input on the Landis fork. The trouble with that STC is that the same tire size has to be run all around. Sure don't want an 8.50 hanging off the nose of the C182. Happy flying!

makingmemories wrote:Is an STC required to install 8.50's on the mains of a Cessna 182B and is it legal for the owner, not an A&P, to do the work. Thanks for all the input on the Landis fork. The trouble with that STC is that the same tire size has to be run all around. Sure don't want an 8.50 hanging off the nose of the C182. Happy flying!

Copies of field approvals -especially in Alaska are available from the FAA records -Oak,city. In all reality 700 mains with 600 nose is more than enough with lower drag. I've been in some really knarly places with no big deal.

There's a 182 at my airport that has the Landis fork on the front and he's running smaller tires all around. Not sure what size, though. But I know the Landis STC requires at least 850's all around. You can go bigger on the mains.

You do not have to run the same tires all the way around with a Landis fork, honest. I know what the STC says, I have one right here. They issue field approvals all the time for tires still. There are many, many Cessna's flying around with a Landis fork, 8.50 nosewheel tire and 29" Airtracs or 8.50 X 10's on the mains. The big deal about the Landis fork is the $$$$$.

As to the 8.50 on the nose being "draggy", I have not noticed much of that on the 206. We lost about 3 knots in cruise from the 6.00 nose/7.00 mains to 8.50 nose/8.50X10 mains.

As to your question, I don't believe 8.50's are on the TCDS for the 182, I could easily be wrong but it would be easy to look up. If they were you'd have to get an A&P to change them, I do believe.

gb

gbflyer wrote:You do not have to run the same tires all the way around with a Landis fork, honest. I know what the STC says, I have one right here. They issue field approvals all the time for tires still. There are many, many Cessna's flying around with a Landis fork, 8.50 nosewheel tire and 29" Airtracs or 8.50 X 10's on the mains. The big deal about the Landis fork is the $$$$$.

As to the 8.50 on the nose being "draggy", I have not noticed much of that on the 206. We lost about 3 knots in cruise from the 6.00 nose/7.00 mains to 8.50 nose/8.50X10 mains.

As to your question, I don't believe 8.50's are on the TCDS for the 182, I could easily be wrong but it would be easy to look up. If they were you'd have to get an A&P to change them, I do believe.

gb

One thing you need to do with bigger mains is bigger brakes - Double puck Cleavland's on my 56.

182 STOL driver wrote:

gbflyer wrote:You do not have to run the same tires all the way around with a Landis fork, honest. I know what the STC says, I have one right here. They issue field approvals all the time for tires still. There are many, many Cessna's flying around with a Landis fork, 8.50 nosewheel tire and 29" Airtracs or 8.50 X 10's on the mains. The big deal about the Landis fork is the $$$$$.

As to the 8.50 on the nose being "draggy", I have not noticed much of that on the 206. We lost about 3 knots in cruise from the 6.00 nose/7.00 mains to 8.50 nose/8.50X10 mains.

As to your question, I don't believe 8.50's are on the TCDS for the 182, I could easily be wrong but it would be easy to look up. If they were you'd have to get an A&P to change them, I do believe.

gb

One thing you need to do with bigger mains is bigger brakes - Double puck Cleavland's on my 56.

I have the 850's all around with single puck Cleaveland's and no problem stopping in a very short distance.

maulewaco wrote:Why would you need bigger brakes? You need bigger Balls or better pilot skills. Brakes are for taxi only. If you need them to slow down on the runway you may be outside the box and should just get a parachute to pull after touch down.

I have not met 182 Stol Driver, but have seen many of his post's and he seems to know what he's talking about for the most part. He also sounds like a very capable, experienced pilot.

I know one guy who has them on his 172. The only major problem he had was his nose wheel got stuck sideways once. Wondering "what the F'ark?" putting in full rudder just to keep going straight he returned to land. Once the nose wheel touched down it straightened out again. Though he's flown this way extensively, he either needs to get bigger mains or a smaller nose gear as it's a bit of a pain getting the mains to touch first. Otherwise, he's pretty darned happy with the setup.

I had a Landis nose fork on my old 1958 182, and put an 8.50 x 6 on the nose and 8.50 x 10s on the mains with a log book entry. I think you definitely need to have a certified mechanic sign off on your log book. I also had the double puck breaks and they would burn rubber on asphalt if I got too heavy footed.

Nizina

I run 8.00's on the mains and a 7.00 on the nose with the heavy duty 206 fork. This combo is fine and will get me into beaches, gravel bars, gravel runways, grass, etc. and also into places I really shouldn't go.

Must be cocktail hour there on the West Coast.

gb

gbflyer wrote:Must be cocktail hour there on the West Coast.

gb

Chuckle I was thinking the same thing.

gbflyer wrote:Must be cocktail hour there on the West Coast.

gb

At least he used punctuation.

Hey Eric,
I just went to send you a PM, but noticed the previous weren't open - so sorry to the rest of you for chatting in the post. Flew over your place outside of McCarthy in the 180 about a month ago and saw you wave. Thought to stop in, but the kids were hungry, etc. Nice little slice of heaven you've got. Maybe we'll meet in the future.

For the discussion, 8.50 are not on the TCDS for the 182. The 8.50X6 in front and 8.50X10 mains seem to be a good fit, but as I found can still be a bit small for some beach work. I landed my 182 out at Copalis with just 6.00's on the mains and a 5.00 up front; but not all beaches and gravel bars are created equal.
I sold the 182 to a guy who was talking big about needing to put on the double puck brakes as soon as he could. A little demonstration of getting the aircraft slowed down and hitting the mark to enable short field performance and I think I talked him out of it. Obviously the 8.50s and bigger have more torque with the bigger radius, not to mention inertia of their own. I'm guessing you could still lock up a set of 8.50s with single puck brakes on the asphalt? If you have the force to do that, not much more you can do with double pucks, I suppose. There must be a tire diameter, though where the torque arm is such that double pucks would be of benefit - there are times after all when you just find yourself in need of the binders! I would guess you'd see a weight vs. improved braking benefit with the double pucks somewhere around the 20 - 25" tire diameter range?

Matt 7GCBC wrote:Hey Eric,
I just went to send you a PM, but noticed the previous weren't open - so sorry to the rest of you for chatting in the post. Flew over your place outside of McCarthy in the 180 about a month ago and saw you wave. Thought to stop in, but the kids were hungry, etc. Nice little slice of heaven you've got. Maybe we'll meet in the future.

Matt

Do drop in some time. Best to land to the west -- up hill. Kids are always welcome and we can always make snacks to hold them over.

Best
Eric

maulewaco wrote:Why would you need bigger brakes? You need bigger Balls or better pilot skills. Brakes are for taxi only. If you need them to slow down on the runway you may be outside the box and should just get a parachute to pull after touch down.

So you never use brakes on the runway? Never? You must be coming in really really slow, or else landing on a helluva long runway. Everyone I've ever seen compete in a short landing contest used the brakes- some to an extreme degree. I use the brakes regularly myself on shorter strips as required. That doesn't necesarily mean I'm too fast, just that the strip is short. If a person feels he needs more brakes, it doesn't necesarily follow that he's trying to keep up with the Joneses- maybe he just needs more brakes. I will agree with you though about some of the other gizmo's that some people feel they just gotta have. Kinda funny sometimes to check out the "must-have mods" threads on some of the aviation websites.

Eric

There is a "Tundra Tire Worksheet" available on the Alaska Flight Standards web site. Download it, follow the instructions, and you SHOULD be able to approve almost any size tire on almost any airplane in almost any district. That's the theory, at least. It is a good place to start.

As Matt noted, the 8.5 tires are not on the TCDS for the 182 and the TCDS is always a good place to start when asking about mods or changing something on a plane. Look it up, save it to your hard drive, and you'll find a wealth of information there.

I never liked same size tires on all three corners on the Cessna tri gear planes. One size down on the nose works great. I ran 8.50 x 6.00 on the mains and 8.00 x 6.00 for quite a while on a 206, and that was a nice all round combination. Not HUGE tires, but big enough for most stuff. Used a Landes nose fork.

This was done with a field approval (deviation from the Landes stc, which calls for 8.50 tires all round on this mod).

Good luck.

MTV