Backcountry Pilot • Federal 2500 hydraulics

Federal 2500 hydraulics

Two of the best inventions ever, skis and airplanes, together.
6 postsPage 1 of 1

Federal 2500 hydraulics

Just got screwed out of a set of 3000's. Will 2500's be to small for my 180? In the process of being shafted by the 3000 people I sold my LW3600. S I have found a set of 2500's but am concerened with them being to small. 2550 gross weight for the '55 180.
Thanks
C-180 offline
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 8:03 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: Federal 2500 hydraulics

Well, as is often the case, the answer is clear as mud: "It depends".

First, what model ski are you describing? I assume AWB 2500??? If so, are they AWB 2500 or 2500A models? I know the A models were approved on the older 180's, and they are also approved with 8.50 X 6.00 tires, which is a bonus. I've got AWB 2500's with A model rigger arms, and run 8.50's on a Cessna 170.

These skis are pretty small for even my airplane, which has a 2200 pound GW. But the biggest factor is related to the type of use you're going to put them to. If you're talking about snow the likes of what I've come to expect in most places where people fly on skis i8n the lower 48, they'll probably work fine. Every picture I see of airplanes on skis down here, there is very little snow. Nothing sinks in. If that's the case where you're at, these skis should be fine.

On the other hand, if you plan to go north, or anywhere there is REALLY some snow, as in deep and no help close by, then I think these skis are a great way to hone your wilderness survival skills.

You can improve their performance A LITTLE by extending the plastic bottoms out to the sides, and that will definitely help in deeper snow. They DO have plastic bottoms, right? IF not, put some on.

Check the rigger arms, and make sure all the parts are there. Look carefully at the riggers, AND especially at the tunnels for cracks or other damage, or ugly repairs. Mine cracked out around the pedestals, and one rigger arm cracked. Steve at Atlee Dodge went through them completely and mine are now like new. Bring $$. Steve did a great job, and it was cheap, compared to what I expected.

They are durable skis, so if all you plan to do is buzz over to a fly in or four, etc, they'll work fine. My experience is something the size of a 180 on skis can be a LOT of work, no matter how good the skis are, IF you take it into any challenging snow conditions.

They are also heavy--around 120 pounds the set, as I recall, but that's typical for retractable skis.

MTV
mtv offline
Knowledge Base Author
User avatar
Posts: 10514
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 1:47 am
Location: Bozeman

Re: Federal 2500 hydraulics

Thanks MTV, I haven't seen them yet. But our flying is really not into much more than two feet of snow, mostly lake hopping. The LW3600 were heavy also around 65#'s per side.
Thanks
C-180
C-180 offline
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 8:03 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: Federal 2500 hydraulics

I too have awb 2500s on my 170, mine came off a 180 and in my opinion they are much better suted to a 170. mine were in rough shape when I got them because of the weight of a 180 and the fact that the pedistal suports the weight of the airplane directly on the tunnel. they will work if you are carful with them but 3200s are much better on a 180.
River rat offline
Supporter
User avatar
Posts: 750
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Saskatchewan Can.
tricycles are for little girls

Re: Federal 2500 hydraulics

C-180,
Larry if that's you we could talk somemore.
Dave
dlhanst offline
User avatar
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:48 pm
Location: Carson City, Nevada

Re: Federal 2500 hydraulics

Thanks Dave, We are good to go!
Larry
C-180 offline
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 8:03 pm
Location: Michigan

DISPLAY OPTIONS

6 postsPage 1 of 1

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Latest Features

Latest Knowledge Base