I've looked at two supposedly no damage history Cessna 180K's with a row cherry rivets along the front of the wet wing bay. On the top they are flush and the bottom they are universal. Does anyone know if the factory really sent them out like this or is this a clue to damage history? Guessing that the new 182's with wet wings might have the same construction as the last of the 180's and 185's.

Seen more than one like that that were original. I'd venture to guess you're good, or at least the repair was done like eCessna did it.

180Marty wrote:I've looked at two supposedly no damage history Cessna 180K's with a row cherry rivets along the front of the wet wing bay. On the top they are flush and the bottom they are universal. Does anyone know if the factory really sent them out like this or is this a clue to damage history? Guessing that the new 182's with wet wings might have the same construction as the last of the 180's and 185's.

Make sure when buying a wet wing plane that the tanks had been resealed recently. We thought since it was a wet wing “goodbye bladder troubles”. How wrong we were on that attitude because both wing had to come off and sent out to be resealed. The cost was hell of a lot more than buying bladders and having them bought new
And installed two to three time over.

Also, have you flown a late model 180?? I noticed that you have an early model 180 and (please do not take offense late model guys) the late model planes are extreamly heavy on the controls compared to what you are flying. For the same amount of money you would be better off buying a 185 because the gross weight is higher plus you get more hp to haul it with. The late model 180 with a standard engine and loaded is chore to get off of the ground.

Thanks guys for the replies. If I ever do the 180K, I think I'd do the low compression Pponk. Will probably just be happy with what I have. Funny,besides the 180, I had a PA12 for a year and a half that was modified a lot. It had AOSS on the landing gear and Goodyear blimp tires and I find the 180 way more easy to fly with the 29 Bushwheels.

For $10 you can order the CD from the FAA that'll have the complete (official) repair history of the aircraft; i.e., 337's that were filed.

My 180K has the same set-up and has no (known) damage history. In any case, the rivets are symmetrical between the two wings so it's hard for me to imagine how they could be the result of damage. I have asked A&Ps this question before but have never gotten a satisfactory answer.

A copy of the latest revision of the illustrated parts manual for the C-180K should give you type and size of rivet for that location. It's a quick way to check correct, proper configuration.
There maybe SB's related to that as well.

Not all repairs get a 337 so that isn't a surefire way to determine damage history. I once looked at a C-170 for myself. An N- number search revealed an NTSB accident report where it went over on its back in Western AK but no paperwork/logbook entry returning it to service. The owner kinda shrugged about it.

Cheers,
Dave

Quickdraw1 wrote:

180Marty wrote:I've looked at two supposedly no damage history Cessna 180K's with a row cherry rivets along the front of the wet wing bay. On the top they are flush and the bottom they are universal. Does anyone know if the factory really sent them out like this or is this a clue to damage history? Guessing that the new 182's with wet wings might have the same construction as the last of the 180's and 185's.

Make sure when buying a wet wing plane that the tanks had been resealed recently. We thought since it was a wet wing “goodbye bladder troubles”. How wrong we were on that attitude because both wing had to come off and sent out to be resealed. The cost was hell of a lot more than buying bladders and having them bought new
And installed two to three time over.

Also, have you flown a late model 180?? I noticed that you have an early model 180 and (please do not take offense late model guys) the late model planes are extreamly heavy on the controls compared to what you are flying. For the same amount of money you would be better off buying a 185 because the gross weight is higher plus you get more hp to haul it with. The late model 180 with a standard engine and loaded is chore to get off of the ground.

Below is a picture of the ‘79 180 with the tanks newly redone and just before the paint job. It is a great illustration of where the tanks are relative in the wing.

So does that mean the top skin was removed to do the reseal job? I thought just those oval inspection plates on top were removed and all the work done through them.

180Marty wrote:So does that mean the top skin was removed to do the reseal job? I thought just those oval inspection plates on top were removed and all the work done through them.

Yes, they removed that whole silver section of the top skin to get down in the wet wing to reseal it.

Both wings were taken off and transported to the wet wing guru. The whole thing was a major pain