My dad and I are looking for a 180 cessna, and are kind of overwhelmed with the choices and price ranges. We would like a 59 or newer, simply because of the panel, but aren't stuck on that.

Does anybody have any tips on what to look for, areas of worry, common problem areas?

There are a few 180's and 182's of that vintage in the area that I could look at, kind of like a run thru of a pre-buy. It seems like it might be helpful, just something to compare too. I have that book on buying a 182, is that a good start on areas to look at?

How likely are the engines to make it to 1500?

I have seen a few 53 and 54's with low time A engines, I thought that they were obsolete? (if it's an A, walk away)

What does it cost to do the fuel bladders when they need work?

How much for a Prop OH? Are the props often beyond limits?

Thanks for any tips, Lance

Hey Lance
You can put in Joe's Favorites in your search engine. He has a section that gives the majors changes per year on the 180/185's.

A lot of guys, including me, prefer the earlier years. And K, or newer engines. If you can get one for a good price with a runout engine, I would go that route and put the pponk engine in it. Better performance and longer TBO.

I just put a bladder in mine. About a 1/2 day work and $1000.00 for the bladder.

A lot of them have damage history, so check the repairs closely. Takesomeone with you that is very familiar with them.

Bottom ends seem pretty good. Be rare for cyls. to make TBO, from what I've seen

On the 180 club website a few months ago, someone posted things to watch for. You might try and pull that up

Good luck Gary

The early 180's are sweet, generally lighter and usually less expensive to purchase...although it's just the price of admission.

AD's for the 180 are few, so at least that's not a major concern. Do look for groundloop history evidenced by wing replacements, gear box repairs, reskins of the belly or top of cabin, etc. Mine was supposedly never ground looped, but had a wing and top cabin repair. Hmm. They don't have to say what caused the damage in the logs, only that a repair was made. If done well, no problem.

The jack screws for the stabilizer should have been inspected either via inspection covers (not all have them) or, preferably, with the tail off.

Yes, the "A" engine has potential issues (funky oil cooler inlet can lead to overheating), but there are many still flying with no problems. Core value is definitely in question though. An airplane with one would be a ripe candidate for an engine upgrade, so price it accordingly.

Bottom ends going beyond 1500 are common. Tops ends? Fughedaboudit. My engine has 1300 SMOH, with new cylinders. It runs flawlessly, burns no oil and doesn't leak anywhere. I'll run it until oil burn, leaks or oil analysis tell me otherwise. For props, the original Hartzell is a dud, but current versions are OK. The Mac seems to win the prop-ularity contest. I have the 88" seaplane C203 and like it a lot.

Stancil has great info on his site. It was a good education for me when I was shopping for my 180 last year. The skywagons.org site is another good one. Lots of sage wisdom there that kept me away from a clean, but HEAVY '53 180. You'll need to define your mission, and hunt for the plane that suits it. You can find leathered up Cadillacs or stripped down plow mules among the 180 fleet. Both have their place, but light, makes right. These ships are a blast with half tanks on a cold day, and can still haul a ridiculously large amount of stuff when you need to. The extended baggage STC is a must. It totally transforms the utility capability of the airplane.

The prebuy book on the 182 is probably good info. The airframes are basically the same, except for the sissy wheel up front.
Buy one, and you'll have to shave your legs and rename yourself "Nancy".

Good luck! Post more Q's as you come up with them. Good folks here.

Brian

shortfielder is right. Many, many of that vintage of 180's have been worked hard, either in Alaska, or in the western US during the mineral and oil exploration days. Gear box damage is very common, look for wrinkles in the skin behind the gearbox, smoking rivets, sprung door posts, etc. It's not the end of the airplane by any means, just real expensive to fix. I understand that the older ones have thinner skinned wings, so you might see some patches on the top of the wing. Also, the ones that have a lot of float time on them are prone to corrosion, usually pretty easy to find in the tail. If you don't need floats, one without a float kit is a plus in my book. Usually a little less money to buy, too. Skis are also tough on gear boxes, so look for ski fittings or logbook entries.

I like a Sportsman STOL cuff as well, just personal preference, though. Some guys say the wing is perfect right from the factory.

The cowling is a pain, with a zillion screws.

We did a prop 2 summers ago. Hub was OK, needed new blades (2-blade Mac seaplane prop). The tariff was $6K.

The cylinders might make TBO if it's been flown frequently throughout the life of the overhaul.

I've owned 3 of them, 2 - '55's and a '57. We liked the '57 the best, for no particular reason other than a little more legal useful, plus it was just a nice airplane.

They are a great 'ol workhorse, the plane that put Cessna on the map. I think it's probably a pretty good time to buy one with gas prices the way they are.

gb

Most props I found were out of O/H limits either through hours or more commonly calendar time. Just because they only fly 25 hours a year doesn't mean it's cool to go 20 years without pulling them apart. Some of them have to be pulled apart every five years or so. If it's out or been a real long time in years I'd get it done pre-deal or get the price knocked down.
Other areas are the whole "flying tail" trim system. From the wheel in the cockpit to the jackscrews.
The gear legs, gear boxes, tail stinger, axles. Especially if it's been on skis.
Of course float history or history in a salty, humid environment would lead you to look for corrosion EVERYWHERE, especially if it's got new paint.
Other than that just look over the damage history really well. I've seen bunk fixes that had been torn out of a logbook to conceal it in the case of a certain 185.
Mostly just sit down in a quiet room and look at the books backwards taking into account anything including gaps in dates and look at the base of the page binding to see if any pages had been pulled out then go out to the plane and just look it over well in a relaxed, well lit environment. Don't look at anything in particular just look at it all first. Wrinkles, different looking rivets, slight color changes in paint matching, etc. You get the idea.

Thanks for the tips, keep the advise coming. Any little bit help, it is amazing how the excitement of a new plane can end at the first annual.

Thanks for the help, I am still trying to find that post on the 180 club. Do any of you remember the title?

Thanks, keep coming with the help--Lance

I fly a 1959 182 and I don't shave my legs either. I have a few videos of some of the places I have had this old 182. If Akroguy will take a look at some of my videos on www.youtube.com/skybobb and then show me some of the same places out his front window I will consider getting out my razor. Bob

Cheater!

SuperDave!
Nice shots, You da man! That was totally cheating on my part. I won't cheat this year, I promise. I'll just have my underpowered 180 to play with. I may still do Simonds again though. We'll see if I'm suffering from acute testicular swelling on that particular day!
I don't care what anyone says, that was fun.

SuperDave What landing strip is that? Great pictures of the landing sequence. Good Job. Bob

It was Vines.

Wow, that is a bit intense for a flat country boy like myself. That is a wild looking strip.

I don't want to start any nosewheel vs. tailwheel debates, I know that the 182's are great planes, I just want an 180.

Cool pictures--you guys are nuts!!!

So do I, I would love to have a 180 but I couldn't pass up this 182. I flew a 170 for 835 hours. So it isn't like I am a TW virgin.

About Vines landing strip in the Frank church Wilderness of Idaho. The FLY IDAHO BOOK says this about Vines.
AIRPORT CAUTION * NOT MAINTAINED * USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Recommended landing upstream RWY27, takeoff downstream RWY 9. *On approach follow river to avoid trees.* Caution: Large rocks on edge of runway.* Rough runway surface.* Morning sun blinds pilot on takeoff. This strip is suitable for Super Cub type aircraft.* Runway surface conditions subject to ongoing deterioration. * Special consideration should be given to density altitude,turbulence, and mountain flying proficiency. Useage limited to highly experienced mountain pilots.

skybobb wrote:AIRPORT CAUTION * NOT MAINTAINED * USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. Recommended landing upstream RWY27, takeoff downstream RWY 9. *On approach follow river to avoid trees.* Caution: Large rocks on edge of runway.* Rough runway surface.* Morning sun blinds pilot on takeoff. This strip is suitable for Super Cub type aircraft.* Runway surface conditions subject to ongoing deterioration. * Special consideration should be given to density altitude,turbulence, and mountain flying proficiency. Useage limited to highly experienced mountain pilots.

Sounds like a personal invitation to me!!!!!!

Gump

lancef53 wrote: We would like a 59 or newer, simply because of the panel, but aren't stuck on that.

Don't discount that lower panel in the older C180's. You can make a fairly nice pseudo "T" instrument layout in the old panel, and the view over the nose is a whole lot nicer.

Gump

Been into Vines in the 182. Agree that there are plenty of large rocks just off the narrow central portion, but wasn't rougher than any of the other non-manicured strips. Don't shave your legs just yet, Skybob!
Matt

I can't hold it in any longer.
I shave my legs and I sit down to pee and I'm getting a nosewheel conversion kit for my 180 next.

lowflyin'G3 wrote:I can't hold it in any longer.
I shave my legs and I sit down to pee and I'm getting a nosewheel conversion kit for my 180 next.

I shave my back and stand up to poop. So, where does that put me on the foodchain?

Really though, the 182 is the same airplane and can eat rocks with the best of the taildraggers, 'cept your prop is a wee bit closer to them at times.

I have to admit I was VERY tempted by some very nicely appointed 182 straight tails...with better panels, paint and interiors than the 180 I picked. I could have saved a solid $20k too. But man, sometimes you gotta just go with the urge and get what you really want and worked hard for all your life.

Another year's insurance premium will be due soon. Ask me again at that time why I just HAD to have a 180.

G3,
Now that you have the station wagon, you could give us all a ride to show us the way into Dewey and Simmonds. Whadaya say?

Quit scarin' me, I'm freakin' out just thinkin' about it Mattie! You better go first. If you make it I'll follow. The only thing I know for sure is that you don't want to go into Simonds while it's too wet or you'll slide to the left on landing and into those trees just off the left wingtip. I only went in there once and it was in the cheater airplane!
We'll ride in with Chad or let him go first in the "mistress" then we'll try it!
One thing I know about both of those places is that you don't want to overshoot either but you don't want to undershoot either. Kinda like porridge....juuuuust right!