I have questions about the Sportsman STOL mods for the 172, I have a 67H with a 220HP CS mod, other than that its stock. I have been looking at adding a Sportsman STOL kit. I have run across web sights that clam its magic and others that say that there is no difference. Here are the things that I have been warned may change in a non positive way.
1. Ability to land in gusting wind conditions, including cross winds. It’s a fact of life where I live.
2. Slower cruise speed, I have read mixed reviews on that. Could this be a factor of cruise altitude? I am of the understanding that a high lift wing is more efficient at higher altitude, I normally cruise at 6500 to 8500 Ft. Will I lose cruise speed at these altitudes?
3. Insurance rates, Higher rates with STOL kit?
I am a week end flyer that wants to fly back country strips, I currently use the aircraft for cross country flights with an average 152 MPH @ 70% 11GPH. I would hate to loose those numbers.
I realize that removing wheel pants, larger tires will slow the plane down, however its only an afternoon task to reconfigure for best cross country performance.
If any one has a similar aircraft with the Sportsman mod I would love to hear back.
Thanks 172Heavy

Absolutly do it, I put one on my 55 170B and there is no downside! There is a reason cessna copied (sort of) the sportsman stol on the newer 172. On mine it improved the crosswind ability, likely because of the aleron gap seals. If anything it improves the cruse speed or makes no diference at all. I too have heard that it doesn't help but any of those guys when I rode with them they came down final at 70mph or even faster so of course it made no diference. Just my two cents... but if I bought another cessna it would be one of the first mods.

Ditto. Whoever passed those tidbits off on you hasn't flown a Cessna before and after the Sportsman kit was added.

I saw little if any degradation of top speed, a significant decrease in stall speed, and MUCH better aileron authority. The stall became a gentle, buffeting affair, with no tendency to roll off.

Do it. You won't be sorry.

MTV

172heavy wrote:I have questions about the Sportsman STOL mods for the 172, I have a 67H with a 220HP CS mod, other than that its stock. I have been looking at adding a Sportsman STOL kit. I have run across web sights that clam its magic and others that say that there is no difference. Here are the things that I have been warned may change in a non positive way.
1. Ability to land in gusting wind conditions, including cross winds. It’s a fact of life where I live.
2. Slower cruise speed, I have read mixed reviews on that. Could this be a factor of cruise altitude? I am of the understanding that a high lift wing is more efficient at higher altitude, I normally cruise at 6500 to 8500 Ft. Will I lose cruise speed at these altitudes?
3. Insurance rates, Higher rates with STOL kit?
I am a week end flyer that wants to fly back country strips, I currently use the aircraft for cross country flights with an average 152 MPH @ 70% 11GPH. I would hate to loose those numbers.
I realize that removing wheel pants, larger tires will slow the plane down, however its only an afternoon task to reconfigure for best cross country performance.
If any one has a similar aircraft with the Sportsman mod I would love to hear back.
Thanks 172Heavy

Never had one on a 172, have had 2 180's with Sportsman cuff, one with a Horton, and the 206 we have now has a Horton.

1. You'll like it, just have to slow it down a bit more. Use the factory numbers and it will really float.
2. You will lose cruise speed, 3-5 knots. Sorry, been that way on every one of ours. Seems like there is a penalty for everything you hang on them.
3. Don't think so.

That said, I'd consider a Horton. Does a better job of getting the airplane airborne in my experience, and less money to install than a Sportsman. Those formers near the windshield are very time consuming. I believe the Sportsman is more effective once out of ground effect.

gb

After you do the stol kit go fly it a little bit, then put a set of VG's on it, between the 2 you will have a totally different airplane than you do now and absolutely now down side except the drop of a couple om MPH.
As above to make it work you will have to slow it down.
Have fun GT

I think on some of the later 172's they already had a leading edge cuff. Know a guy that had one these and he put a STOL kit on it and it did not do much to improve things (he said). Now that would be a lot different if he started with a wing with no leading edge cuff.

I have a stock wing 182B and have been kicking it around a lot. Saw this on ebay. He has both wings on ebay to be auctioned off separately. http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Cessna-1 ... rtsQ5fGear

Tim

I looked at both Horton and Sportsman and went with the Spotsman. They are both good kits.
Anyone tells you they don't help is not flying slow enough.
I don't notice any airspeed loss but then again I'm on floats.I'll soon see......ski season
in about two weeks.......can't hardly wait

[quote="qmdv"]I think on some of the later 172's they already had a leading edge cuff. Know a guy that had one these and he put a STOL kit on it and it did not do much to improve things (he said). Now that would be a lot different if he started with a wing with no leading edge cuff.

Im not sure about a 172 but we put a sportsman on a 206 that had the factory cuff and it made a big diference. I would bet your friend fits into the "not going slow enough" catigory.

once again I screwed up my quote... doh!

We put the Sportsman STOL kit on my '74 172 and are still amazed at the differences. The '74 172 is the first year of the 172 with the new factory cuff and there is noticable differences in the Sportsman cuff over the factory one. I can now fly the aircraft slow enough that I don't have enough wind over the elevator to get a decent flair at landing. I was talking with my mechanic yesterday and we're investigating adding VG's in an attempt to keep the elevator effective below 35kts. I consider the Sportsman STOL kit to be a requirement to any other Cessna that I acquire. (along witht he Rosens, the BAS harnesses, the JPI-700, and the LAndes fork with BIG tires)

I've already given up on fast with the large tires, Landes fork, and AoA probe hanging in the breeze but I'm getting better at going reaaaaal slow with both windows open.

Don

Ok, I gotta add my $.02. If you go on the Stene avaition website and read about the sportsman STOl, you may come away doubting theur claims. I think they're a little stretched too. If you go into the testimonial section, you get a better picture.
Your H Model should have the early wing which will benefit the most. If you look at the later Cessna wing, the lead edge is cuffed a little. I'm not sure the years, but I think '69 was the first change, with a bigger one later. The early (170B) type wing benefits the most.
Being realistic, here's what you can expect: A drop in stall speed of at least 5 mph. Much more stable handling at low approach speeds. A very significant increase in glide ratio, easily over 10:1. Better aileron feel / control.
I don't know what you get for cruise with 220 hp but I doubt that you will notice any change. Maybe a little loss?
As to crosswinds, you will have improved aileron control, but you are also landing at a lower speed, so the crosswind component could increase. Gust handling is improved as your angle of attack is lower at a given speed.
Now if you really want to stop before you touch the ground, add vg's.
Would I reccomend it. Absolutely. It makes a safer, more capable airplane.
Install is pretty straight forward on your plane. It's just the 400 or so pop rivets takes time. If you need any hints, I've done 4 of them now, ( including helping CCurrie).

You need to get in touch with Reed White, (he has a site at www.alta-research.bistrobrew.com/whiter.htm) He has a LOT of time in his Horton Stol equipped 172, I believe it has vg's also. It also has long range tanks and a bigger engine, not sure on which engine exactly. He wrote "The Flyer's Recreation Guide to the N.W." , and developed the Lava Hot Springs Airpark.

172heavy wrote:I have questions about the Sportsman STOL mods for the 172, I have a 67H with a 220HP CS mod, other than that its stock. I have been looking at adding a Sportsman STOL kit. I have run across web sights that clam its magic and others that say that there is no difference. Here are the things that I have been warned may change in a non positive way.
1. Ability to land in gusting wind conditions, including cross winds. It’s a fact of life where I live.
2. Slower cruise speed, I have read mixed reviews on that. Could this be a factor of cruise altitude? I am of the understanding that a high lift wing is more efficient at higher altitude, I normally cruise at 6500 to 8500 Ft. Will I lose cruise speed at these altitudes?
3. Insurance rates, Higher rates with STOL kit?
I am a week end flyer that wants to fly back country strips, I currently use the aircraft for cross country flights with an average 152 MPH @ 70% 11GPH. I would hate to loose those numbers.
I realize that removing wheel pants, larger tires will slow the plane down, however its only an afternoon task to reconfigure for best cross country performance.
If any one has a similar aircraft with the Sportsman mod I would love to hear back.
Thanks 172Heavy

Compare the Sportsman leading edge with the Horton (or Owl, or MASA, or...) folks. There is a HUGE difference in the size and camber of the leading edge between the two.

I would agree that the Horton cuff improves somewhat the performance of the original Cessna wing. As noted by several, Cessna incorporated a recontoured leading edge in the early 70's. But that change was very small. The Horton cuff doesn't change that wing a whole lot. The Sportsman cuff does, and adds both significant additional wing surface area, as well as a recambered leading edge.

The labor to install these things is largely in the installation of the cuff itself, so installation is going to be pretty similar in cost. If twas me, I'd go with the Sportsman LE.

The Horton does help, but the Sportsman does more.

Take a look at the wing leading edge of the Cirrus airplanes. They illustrate MOLE technology, with a leading edge extension in the outboard portion of the wing. This leading edge droop is derived from the same NASA research that the Sportsman kit is based on.

MTV

Here is the airfoil comparison... Just ask people who put the Sportsman on the Cessna Camber cuff and you pretty much have a testimonial of what the Sportsman does over all of the other leading edge STOL mod's.

http://fliteresearch.com/sportsman_stol ... menuID=4~4

I can share alot of experience (theory, experience's, etc.) on these but it would be exceptionally wind'd. Nearly 25% of kits we sell are for people removing old stol kits or combining it with the Sportsman.

To do the whole thing a person is looking at $4000 to $4200, including: kit, installation, and no paint. Hands down the most bang for the buck... Putting the kit on a fire breathing 172 would make for an impressive performer.

Believe it or not, my Horton STOL Kit arrived yesterday! It looks like it is in the factory boxes (from 87). I intended on selling it and buying a Sportsman but the way my finances are and needing a annual at the end of the month I have been thinking of just using the Horton Kit. I figure I might be able to get $7-$800 out of this Horton Kit (which is what I am into it) so it would probably cost another $1,200 - $1,300 if I want to get the Sportsman.

If any of you guys have spent time with both kits I want to ask some questions. First, would you fork out an extra $1,200 - $1,300 more to have a Sportsman over a Horton? Second, what do you think the stall speed and takeoff difference between the two kits would be? Third, would it be worth the trouble to sell one kit for another? I know which kit I would put on if money wasn't an object, but it is.

I have seen the diagram on the Sportsman site and it looks like the Horton is pretty close to the new Cessna cuff, plus it has the stall fence, wingtips and the aileron gap seals. The Sportsman is pretty much the same without the stall fences but with more cuff and more wing area. The installation should be pretty close so that would be a wash.

I know people that have Horton's think they are great and people with Sportsman's think there great too. What do you think?

Forum member 182 STOL has the Sportman kit and swears by it. I have been in that airplane when it blasts off and it definitely gets your attention. He says it makes just as much difference on landing, and I know he recommends it highly FWIW.

EZFlap wrote:Forum member 182 STOL has the Sportman kit and swears by it. I have been in that airplane when it blasts off and it definitely gets your attention. He says it makes just as much difference on landing, and I know he recommends it highly FWIW.

Yes I have a SPORTSMAN Leading edge kit on my 182 and Love it. I've had others~~~ Horton, OWL,Mid America- Bush and Robertson STOL over the last 40+ years. I like the SPORTSMAN the best ,haven't noticed any airspeed cruise difference . Will not add VG's on my airplane~~thank you not for me.
Sportsman is 2-3 times longer droop (forward of leading edge) and changes the contour of Cessna 2414 airfoil (thank you Marvin Davis) considerably . Marvin Davis FAA Flight test report on SPORTSMAN by going to [email protected] with "Sportsman "in the subject line. Use a LRI and EZflap for full effect departures and landings. Grand Canyon tours with stops at Ghost Ranch for those who can afford the fuel ,approx 20 gallons of 100LL.Takes about 1-1/2to 2 hours out and back from Boulder City . Sportsman STOL Demonstration that will give you a whole new meaning to the word "STOL" . From the southern tip of Baja to Colorado's northern Rocky Mountains SPORTSMAN STOL . Low speed CONTROL is what it's all about.

I have flown with Bush, Horton and Sportsman stol kits. The old Bush and Horton were very similar in design. The Sportsman adds more wing area. About 4 sq feet on my 205 if memory serves me. The sportsman uses little foam blocks glued onto the leading edge for support with the skin glued to them and riveted to the wing. While the horton just rivets on. The Sportsman looks like it just makes the wing more of a "flat bottom" design. While the Bush and Horton have more of a cuff; hard to describe. Install time is about the same. I think you would probably be happy with either one.

My only concern with the Sportsman is the possibility of corrosion down the road from the foam parts. If you have been around 206 and 207 trailing edges on the elevators and trim tabs you will know what I am talking about.

SE6601KF wrote:I have flown with Bush, Horton and Sportsman stol kits. The old Bush and Horton were very similar in design. The Sportsman adds more wing area. About 4 sq feet on my 205 if memory serves me. The sportsman uses little foam blocks glued onto the leading edge for support with the skin glued to them and riveted to the wing. While the horton just rivets on. The Sportsman looks like it just makes the wing more of a "flat bottom" design. While the Bush and Horton have more of a cuff; hard to describe. Install time is about the same. I think you would probably be happy with either one.

My only concern with the Sportsman is the possibility of corrosion down the road from the foam parts. If you have been around 206 and 207 trailing edges on the elevators and trim tabs you will know what I am talking about.

Your corrosion observation is a good one and yes those foam formers eventually hold water. I wouldn't limit it to just the 200 series. Those little corrugations in the control surfaces are a great place for that stuff to hide for sure on all the metal Cessnas. Living on the coast, we use a liberal amount of ACF-50 at every annual. Pretty easy to tell the ones that don't.

There is some difference in installation labor (at least here) between the Sportsman and Horton. I suppose if your mechanic had really done a bunch of Sportsman's, he/she could get it done quicker but it has been our experience that to put one on properly, it is a bit more time consuming. I must say that my mechanic is very particular when it comes to sheet metal, though. Blind rivets get used only in the areas that absolutely cannot be gotten at with a bucking bar, all inspection covers are perfectly cut-out, everything sealed with Pro-seal etc. It's worth it, the install on my current airplane must have been a quickie and it is ugly.

Anyone who has done a few should be able to give you a solid price to do it.

A lot of the old hard - heads up here won't have anything but a stock wing, just like the one Grandpa had. Since personally I am an amateur and need all the help I can get, I am happy with either. If I were you I'd put on the Horton over the Sportsman if for no other reason than you have it.

gb

GB said - "A lot of the old hard - heads up here won't have anything but a stock wing". I have heard that from a couple people. I have heard it is harder to land in crosswinds and that you don't have a lot of sink rate if you need it.

I was coming back Monday from Jackson Hole and landed in Afton for fuel. There was a 20+ crosswind gusting to 25. I almost landed twice before I finally got it down. My 175 has the original metal wingtips that go almost to a point in the back and still felt like I had too much wing. Every time I got close to the ground the wind would haul my butt back up about 20 feet. ATIS said 3 kts @ 14. Thought Runway 16 would be a piece of cake till I got there. Came all the way home with a 85 kt ground speed.

Anyone know any other reasons not to use a STOL?