Jaerl wrote:I guess I should have said, I don't think you really need tundra tires for most flying in trikes. I don't think too many people are going to be doing gravel bars in 172's.

You would be mistaken. There are quite a few intrepid 172 drivers that land and fish off gravel bars up here. Most do have 8.00's though on the mains. And don't forget the 172 tailwheels either. They run anything from 8.00's up to bushwheels up here.

I run 8.00's on the mains and a 7.00 on the nose of my 182. See my avatar or photo gallery for a better view. They work real nice.

Hi AK Grouch.

You are running the same setup I want on my plane except I will probably stick to a 6:00 on front. Your plane is a lot more capable too, so why didn't you but Bushwheels on it? I would love to land on gravel bars too but first things first. I am still trying to hit the numbers every time.

Jerry

I don't have bushwheels on it for several reasons. The best is that my current setup with the 8.00's and double puck brakes will get me anywhere I have any business going, i.e. should go. They don't really give much more drag than stock. In fact, my setup is pretty much the stock setup up here. This set up is boonie friendly as needed for gravel strips, gravel bars, etc., as well as paved city stip friendly too. Where the 206 is kind of a 3/4 ton 4x4 pick up in Alaska, the 182 is like a 1/2 ton truck 4x4 in Alaska. I can't think of anywhere I would need bushwheels that I would want to take my 182 and, while it wasn't in a 182, I have been into some nasty short cub strips. My partner and I used to go into a marginal gravel bar in a turbo 206 with a Honda big red in the back for moose hunting. I learned something over the years though. Life is short enough without taking chances and pushing it. i.e. I will stick with my setup and let others play with the bushwheels, like a friend of mine with his beaver on bushwheels. I'm only jealous of him cuz his bird looks cooler than mine......lol .

The only real reason I have 8.50's on my 170 is for snow- I haven't wanted to put it on skis and need to takeoff and land on some marginal snow conditions. I have 7.00s that I could put on in the summer, and would take me in and out of every strip or easy gravel bar that my engine would, but I'm too lazy to change them. The difference in drag has got to be marginal. A little extra prop clearance in the gravel is nice, I guess. Plus it just looks better

Richard, I couldn't agree more with you. And a bit of extra prop clearance in sand an gravel is always a plus since that prop acts like a Hoover at times.

pat

One distinct advantage of Alaska off-road flying: No gophers = no gopher holes.

Look, folks, you can use itty bitty tires for most any airport , and even some near perfect off airport sites. But, what is it YOU call "the bush"???

One characteristic of off airport flying, and even flying grass strips in the west is that there can be some hidden obstacles, like gopher holes, etc. Last summer, I missed a BADGER hole by not much on an otherwise Boeing sized strip (okay, a little exaggeration, but a beautiful strip). The hole was REALLY hard to see, and I concluded impossible to see from the air, due to the grass on the strip. It was an old hole.

So, you kind of need to define your parameters. I run 8.50 tires on my airplane, mostly because they are a pretty good compromise. The Goodyear 26 inch tires really aren't much larger, and bushwheels are too spendy for what I do. I've done a lot of off airport flying, and I consider ANY grass strip to be an off airport site, due to the potential for surprises. I look them over very carefully prior to landing.

Even so, I'm one good sized critter burrow away from a very expensive landing. I don't obsess about it, but having flown a number of Bushwheel equipped airplanes I can tell you that they are truly wonderful devices, and they MAY indeed be worth every penny.

Now, if you only land on near perfect landing sites, 7.00 tires will work fine for you. But, with a nosewheel airplane, it doesn't take much of an irregularity to put that precious prop into the dirt when the itty bitty nosewheel drops in the hole. If I were flying a nosedragger, it'd have a bit bigger tires...ANY propeller is too expensive to risk that much.

FWIW

MTV

You are right about the holes.Here we call the critters "woodchucks".Couple years ago at Greenville,ME they were parking aircraft alongside the paved runways.The grass had been mowed and to those familiar with them there was an obvious chuck hole.Not obvious to the guy in the 182 behind me.Awful noise I could even hear over my plane when his nosewheel went in that hole.

Always wondered how they made those Q-tip props,now I know.Felt bad for the guy.

Bill

I have 8.5's on the mains and a 7 on the nose of my 172 and I am very happy with that set up for grass and off airport use in OK.

We run 8.50 10s on the mains on our 206s and I am happy with them, I take them onto gravel bars and beaches all summer and either snow covered village strips in the winter, or, now during break-up the muck they call the village strips. We put 29s on one of our planes last year and I wasn't convinced. I think the difference between the footprints (for the beaches) wasn't that appreciable and the nose down attitude due to the height of the 29s made me uncomfortable. I will confirm that the 206 is now doing the majority of bush work here in AK, be it villages, on floats, or off airport stuff, but damn is it cool to see the beavers and otters still doing their thing.